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

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.