Intraperitoneal Pressure and Intra-Abdominal Pressure: Are they the Same?

Author:

Al-Hwiesh Abdullah1,Al-Mueilo Sameer1,Saeed Ibrahiem1,Al-Muhanna Fahd A.1

Affiliation:

1. Nephrology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, King Fahd Hospital of the University, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Background In peritoneal dialysis (PD), a standard therapy for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), the effects of using the peritoneum as an exchange membrane and of dialysate dwelling within the peritoneal cavity creates some mechanical changes, including an increase in intraperitoneal pressure (IPP) that might lead to intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). The diagnosis of IAH and ACS depend on intra-abdominal measurement of IAP by an indirect technique. There is no clear distinction between IPP and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). Our objective in this study was to find if there is real difference between IPP and IAP. Methods This study was conducted at the PD unit of King Fahd Hospital of the University, Al-Khobar, between July 2008 and January 2009. To be included, patients had to have known ESRD for at least 5 years, to be 18 years of age or older at enrollment, with stable body weight and blood pressure, and with no clinical signs of overhydration. Patients with congestive heart failure III and IV (New York Heart Association criteria) and severe pulmonary disease, psychiatric illnesses, neurogenic bladder, known history of peritonitis, or medical or surgical abdominal intervention in the preceding 3 months were excluded. We measured IAP by the direct technique through the peritoneal catheter and by an indirect technique using an intravesical catheter. Results The 25 patients who met the inclusion criteria included 13 men and 12 women, with a mean age of 53 ± 2 years (range: 18 – 76 years). The predominant causes of ESRD were diabetes mellitus and glomerulonephritis. Mean IPP in the dry state (supine) was 9.49 ± 5 mmHg, and mean IAP was 9.4 ± 5.4 mmHg ( p = 0.9). In the dry state (erect), the mean IPP increased to 16.9 ± 7.2 mmHg, and the mean IAP, to 16.4 ± 6.9 mmHg ( p = 0.8). In the filled state (supine), mean IPP was 12.6 ± 4.7 mmHg, and mean IAP, 12.8 ± 4.8 mmHg ( p = 0.88); the erect pressures were 21.4 ± 7 mmHg and 21.6 ± 6.9 mmHg respectively ( p = 0.9). Conclusions Our findings indicate that there is no statistical difference between IPP and IAP in either the erect or the supine position.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Nephrology,General Medicine

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3