Article Sidebar
Published:
Aug 2, 2017Article Details
Copyright of published material remains in the Authors’ name. This allows authors to use their work for their own non-commercial purposes without seeking permission from the Publisher, subject to properly acknowledging the Journal as the original place of publication.
Authors are free to copy, print and distribute their articles, in full or in part, for teaching activities, and to deposit or include their work in their own personal or institutional database or on-line website. Authors are requested to inform the Journal/Publishers of their desire/intention to include their work in a thesis or dissertation or to republish their work in any derivative form (but not for commercial use).
Material submitted for publication in the SAJCC is accepted provided it has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere. Please inform the editorial team if the main findings of your paper have been presented at a conference and published in abstract form, to avoid copyright infringement.
Main Article Content
Correlation between different methods of intraabdominal pressure monitoring in varying intraabdominal hypertension models
Abstract
Background. Advances in intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement have enabled better monitoring and physiological manipulation of patients with intra-abdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome. This study aimed to determine the correlation between transvesical (TV), transgastric (TG) and direct transperitoneal (TP) IAP monitoring at different IAPs in porcine models.
Objectives. To assess the statistical agreement between TV, TG and TP pressure monitoring in a pneumoperitoneum and an intestinal obstruction intra-abdominal hypertension model at different IAPs.
Methods. Fifty-nine pigs were divided into six groups: a control group (Cr; n=5), three pneumoperitoneum groups at pressures of 20 mmHg, 30 mmHg, and 40 mmHg (Pn20, Pn30, Pn40; n=40), and two intestinal-occlusion groups at pressures of 20 mmHg and 30 mmHg (Oc20, Oc30; n=14). IAP was simultaneously measured in each pig using the three methods at different times. The control group did not have any intervention to increase the IAP. Intra-class correlation was used to assess agreement between the methods.
Results. At pressures >20 mmHg, all three methods showed good correlation with each other (Pn20=0.87; Pn30=0.96; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.86). Correlation between TP and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.85; Pn30=0.94; Pn40=0.90; Oc20=0.78; Oc30=0.78); TP and TV (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.83; Pn30=0.95; Pn40=0.86; Oc20=0.59; Oc30=0.88); and importantly between TV and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.95; Pn30=0.98; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.91) was good.
Conclusion. All three measurement methods showed good correlation at pressures >20 mmHg and were unaffected by the type of IAP model. These results suggest that either transvesical or transgastric pressure measurements can be used for IAP measurement when TP pressures are >20 mmHg.
