Research article

Direct intra-abdominal pressure monitoring via piezoresistive pressure measurement: a technical note

Jens Otto¹ , Daniel Kaemmer¹ , Marcel Binnebösel¹ , Marc Jansen¹ , Rolf Dembinski² , Volker Schumpelick¹ and Alexander Schachtrupp¹

¹Department of Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany

²Department of Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital of the RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany

author email corresponding author email

BMC Surgery 2009, 9:5doi:10.1186/1471-2482-9-5

Published:	21 April 2009

Abstract

Background

Piezoresistive pressure measurement technique (PRM) has previously been applied for direct IAP measurement in a porcine model using two different devices. Aim of this clinical study was to assess both devices regarding complications, reliability and agreement with IVP in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was performed in 20 patients randomly scheduled to receive PRM either by a Coach^®-probe or an Accurate++^®-probe (both MIPM, Mammendorf, Germany). Probes were placed on the greater omentum and passed through the abdominal wall paralleling routine drainages. PRM was compared with IVP measurement by t-testing and by calculating mean difference as well as limits of agreement (LA).

Results

There were no probe related complications. Due to technical limitations, data could be collected in 3/10 patients with Coach^® and in 7/10 patients with Accurate++^®. Analysis was carried out only for Accurate++^®. Mean values did not differ to mean IVP values. Mean difference to IVP was 0.1 ± 2.8 mmHg (LA: -5.5 to 5.6 mmHg).

Conclusion

Direct IAP measurement was clinically uneventful. Although results of Accurate++^® were comparable to IVP, the device might be too fragile for IAP measurements in the clinical setting. Local ethical committee trial registration: EK2024