The American Journal of Surgery
Volume 188, Issue 6 , Pages 679-684, December 2004

Continuous intra-abdominal pressure measurement technique

Presented at the 56th Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Surgical Congress, Monterey, California, April 18–21, 2004

  • Zsolt Balogh, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Trauma, Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street Sydney, NSW 2170, Australia
  • ,
  • Felicity Jones, M.Sc.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Trauma, Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street Sydney, NSW 2170, Australia
  • ,
  • Scott D’Amours, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Trauma, Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street Sydney, NSW 2170, Australia
  • ,
  • Michael Parr, M.B.B.S.

      Affiliations

    • Intensive Care Unit, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia
  • ,
  • Michael Sugrue, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Trauma, Liverpool Hospital, Elizabeth Street Sydney, NSW 2170, Australia
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +6-129-828-3927; fax: +6-129-828-3926.

Received 20 July 2004; received in revised form 7 August 2004

Abstract 

Background

Abdominal compartment syndrome can develop within 12 hours of intensive care unit (ICU) admission in high-risk (shock/trauma, burn, pancreatitis, postabdominal aortic surgery) patients. The current standard of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement via the urinary catheter is labor intensive, and its intermittent nature could prevent timely recognition of significant changes in IAP. We propose that continuous IAP (CIAP) can be accurately measured via the irrigation port of a three-way catheter and has good agreement with the standard intermittent IAP (IIAP).

Methods

CIAP was prospectively validated by comparing it with IIAP measurement in general surgical and trauma patients admitted to the ICU with a three-way urinary catheter. CIAP was measured via the irrigation port of the three-way catheter transduced to the bedside monitor as a continuous trace without intermittent clamping of the catheter. The standard IIAP measurements were performed via the urine drainage port after clamping the catheter and filling the bladder with 50 mL of 0.9% saline. Each patient had three separate paired measurements performed in standardized manner to compare CIAP with IIAP. Patients’ demographics, injury severity, type of surgery, body mass index (BMI), and the paired individual IAP measurements were recorded. The paired measurements were compared using the Bland-Altman (B-A) method for comparing a new clinical measurement with an established one. Data are presented as mean ± standard error of the mean.

Results

During a 6-month period (ending in July 2003), 25 patients were investigated. The mean age was 61.5 ± 4 years, 66% were men, and BMI was 29.2 ± 2 kg/m2. Six patients had vascular surgical, four elective and three urgent general surgical interventions. There were 12 trauma patients with ISS of 23 ± 2. The CIAP was 14.2 ± 0.66 (range 2 to 24) mm Hg, and the IIAP was 14.0 ± 0.68 (range 3 to 24) mm Hg. Seventy-five percent of the measured pairs were exactly the same; in 21%, there was 1 mm Hg difference and in 4% 2 mm Hg. There was no measurement difference greater than 2 mm Hg. The mean difference between the CIAP and IIAP was 0.019 ± 0.05 mmHg. The B-A statistics revealed that the difference between the means of measurements in each individual patient was between ±1.96 SD (95% confidence intervals). The B-A scatter plot did not follow any patterns of typical systematic bias.

Conclusion

CIAP measurement with a three-way urinary catheter is a simple and accurate method for monitoring IAP. It has an excellent agreement with the IIAP over wide pressure ranges and should replace the current labor-intensive intermittent technique.

Keywords:  Intra-abdominal hypertension , Abdominal compartment syndrome , Continuous intra-abdominal pressure monitoring , Abdominal perfusion pressure , Intra-abdominal pressure

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0002-9610(04)00417-9

doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.08.052

The American Journal of Surgery
Volume 188, Issue 6 , Pages 679-684, December 2004