What every ICU clinician needs to know about the cardiovascular effects caused by abdominal hypertension

The effects of increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on cardiovascular function are well recognized and include a combined negative effect on preload, afterload and contractility. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on this topic. The presence of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) erroneously increases barometric filling pressures like central venous (CVP) and pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) (since these are zeroed against atmospheric pressure). Transmural filling pressures (calculated by subtracting the pleural pressure from the end-expiratory CVP value) may better reflect the true preload status but are difficult to obtain at the bedside. Alternatively, since pleural pressures are seldom measured, transmural CVP can also be estimated by subtracting half of the IAP from the end-expiratory CVP value, since abdominothoracic transmission is on average 50%. Volumetric preload indicators, such as global and right ventricular end-diastolic volumes or the left ventricular end-diastolic area, also correlate better with true preload. When using functional hemodynamic monitoring parameters like stroke volume variation (SVV) or pulse pressure variation (PPV) one must bear in mind that increased IAP will increase these values (via a concomitant increase in intrathoracic pressure). The passive leg raising test may be a false negative in IAH. Calculation of the abdominal perfusion pressure (as mean arterial pressure minus IAP) has been shown to be a better resuscitation endpoint than IAP alone. Finally, it is re-assuring that transpulmonary thermodilution techniques have been validated in the setting of IAH and abdominal compartment syndrome. In conclusion, the clinician must be aware of the different effects of IAH on cardiovascular function in order to assess the volume status accurately and to optimize hemodynamic performance

Awareness and knowledge of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome: results of an international survey

Background: Surveys have demonstrated a lack of physician awareness of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (IAH/ACS) and wide variations in the management of these conditions, with many intensive care units (ICUs) reporting that they do not measure intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). We sought to determine the association between publication of the 2006/2007 World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (WSACS) Consensus Definitions and Guidelines and IAH/ACS clinical awareness and management. Methods: The WSACS Executive Committee created an interactive online survey with 53 questions, accessible from November 2006 until December 2008. The survey was endorsed by the WSACS, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). A link to the survey was emailed to all members of the supporting societies. Participants of the 3rd World Congress on Abdominal Compartment Syndrome meeting (March 2007, Antwerp, Belgium) were also asked to complete the questionnaire. No reminders were sent. Based on 13 knowledge questions, an overall score was calculated (expressed as percentage). Results: A total of 2,244 of the approximately 10,000 clinicians who were sent the survey responded (response rate: 22.4%). Most of the 2,244 respondents (79.2%) completing the survey were physicians or physicians in training and the majority were residing in North America (53.0%). The majority of responders (85%) were familiar with IAP/IAH/ACS, but only 28% were aware of the WSACS consensus definitions for IAH/ACS. Three quarters of respondents considered the cut-off for IAH to be at least 15 mm Hg, and nearly two thirds believed the cut-off for ACS was higher than the currently suggested consensus definition (20 mm Hg). In 67.8% of respondents, organ dysfunction was only considered a problem with IAP of 20 mm Hg or higher. IAP was measured most frequently via the bladder (91.9%), but the majority reported that they instilled volumes well above the current guidelines. Surgical decompression was frequently used to treat IAH/ACS, whereas medical management was only attempted by about half of the respondents. Decisions to decompress the abdomen were predominantly based on the severity of IAP elevation and presence of organ dysfunction (74.4%). Overall knowledge scores were low (43 +/- 15%); respondents who were aware of the WSACS had a better score compared to those who were not (49.6% vs 38.6%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This survey showed that although most responding clinicians claim to be familiar with IAH and ACS, knowledge of published consensus definitions, measurement techniques, and clinical management is inadequate

Intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome in pancreatitis, paediatrics, and trauma

Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) is an important contributor to early organ dysfunction in trauma and sepsis. However, relatively little is known about the impact of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) in general internal medicine, pregnant patients, and those with obesity or burns. The aim of this paper is to review the pathophysiologic implications and treatment options for IAH in these specific situations. A MEDLINE and PubMed search was performed and the resulting body-of-evidence included in the current review on the basis of relevance and scientific merit. There is increasing awareness of the role of IAH in different clinical situations. Specifically, IAH will develop in most (if not all) severely burned patients, and may contribute to early mortality. One should avoid over-resuscitation of these patients with large volumes of fluids, especially crystalloids. Acute elevations in IAP have similar effects in obese patients compared to non-obese patients, but the threshold IAP associated with organ dysfunction may be higher. Chronic elevations in IAP may, in part, be responsible for the pathogenesis of obesity-related co-morbid conditions such as hypertension, pseudotumor cerebri, pulmonary dysfunction, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and abdominal wall hernias. At the bedside, measuring IAP and considering IAH in all critical maternal conditions is essential, especially in preeclampsia/eclampsia where some have hypothesized that IAH may have an additional role. IAH in pregnancy must take into account the precautions for aorto-caval compression and has been associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Recently, IAP has been associated with the cardiorenal dilemma and hepatorenal syndrome, and this has led to the recognition of the polycompartment syndrome. In conclusion, IAH and ACS have been associated with several patient populations beyond the classical ICU, surgical, and trauma patients. In all at risk conditions the focus should be on the early recognition of IAH and prevention of ACS. Patients at risk for IAH should be identified early through measurements of IAP. Appropriate actions should be taken when IAP increases above 15 mm Hg, especially if pressures reach above 20 mm Hg with new onset organ failure. Although non-operative measures come first, surgical decompression must not be delayed if these fail. Percutaneous drainage of ascites is a simple and potentially effective tool to reduce IAP if organ dysfunction develops, especially in burn patients. Escharotomy may also dramatically reduce IAP in the case of abdominal burns

The respiratory pressure-abdominal volume curve in a porcine model

Background: Increasing intra-abdominal volume (IAV) can lead to intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) or abdominal compartment syndrome. Both are associated with raised morbidity and mortality. IAH can increase airway pressures and impair ventilation. The relationship between increasing IAV and airway pressures is not known. We therefore assessed the effect of increasing IAV on airway and intra-abdominal pressures (IAP). Methods: Seven pigs (41.4 +/−8.5 kg) received standardized anesthesia and mechanical ventilation. A latex balloon inserted in the peritoneal cavity was inflated in 1-L increments until IAP exceeded 40 cmH2O. Peak airway pressure (pPAW), respiratory compliance, and IAP (bladder pressure) were measured. Abdominal compliance was calculated. Different equations were tested that best described the measured pressure-volume curves. Results: An exponential equation best described the measured pressure-volume curves. Raising IAV increased pPAW and IAP in an exponential manner. Increases in IAP were associated with parallel increases in pPAW with an approximate 40% transmission of IAP to pPAW. The higher the IAP, the greater IAV effected pPAW and IAP. Conclusions: The exponential nature of the effect of IAV on pPAW and IAP implies that, in the presence of high grades of IAH, small reductions in IAV can lead to significant reductions in airway and abdominal pressures. Conversely, in the presence of normal IAP levels, large increases in IAV may not affect airway and abdominal pressures

Intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome in burns, obesity, pregnancy, and general medicine

Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) is an important contributor to early organ dysfunction in trauma and sepsis. However, relatively little is known about the impact of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) in general internal medicine, pregnant patients, and those with obesity or burns. The aim of this paper is to review the pathophysiologic implications and treatment options for IAH in these specific situations. A MEDLINE and PubMed search was performed and the resulting body-of-evidence included in the current review on the basis of relevance and scientific merit. There is increasing awareness of the role of IAH in different clinical situations. Specifically, IAH will develop in most (if not all) severely burned patients, and may contribute to early mortality. One should avoid over-resuscitation of these patients with large volumes of fluids, especially crystalloids. Acute elevations in IAP have similar effects in obese patients compared to non-obese patients, but the threshold IAP associated with organ dysfunction may be higher. Chronic elevations in IAP may, in part, be responsible for the pathogenesis of obesity-related co-morbid conditions such as hypertension, pseudotumor cerebri, pulmonary dysfunction, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and abdominal wall hernias. At the bedside, measuring IAP and considering IAH in all critical maternal conditions is essential, especially in preeclampsia/eclampsia where some have hypothesized that IAH may have an additional role. IAH in pregnancy must take into account the precautions for aorto-caval compression and has been associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Recently, IAP has been associated with the cardiorenal dilemma and hepatorenal syndrome, and this has led to the recognition of the polycompartment syndrome. In conclusion, IAH and ACS have been associated with several patient populations beyond the classical ICU, surgical, and trauma patients. In all at risk conditions the focus should be on the early recognition of IAH and prevention of ACS. Patients at risk for IAH should be identified early through measurements of IAP. Appropriate actions should be taken when IAP increases above 15 mm Hg, especially if pressures reach above 20 mm Hg with new onset organ failure. Although non-operative measures come first, surgical decompression must not be delayed if these fail. Percutaneous drainage of ascites is a simple and potentially effective tool to reduce IAP if organ dysfunction develops, especially in burn patients. Escharotomy may also dramatically reduce IAP in the case of abdominal burns

Baseline characteristics of patients in the reduction of events with darbepoetin alfa in heart failure trial (RED-HF)

&lt;p&gt;Aims: This report describes the baseline characteristics of patients in the Reduction of Events with Darbepoetin alfa in Heart Failure trial (RED-HF) which is testing the hypothesis that anaemia correction with darbepoetin alfa will reduce the composite endpoint of death from any cause or hospital admission for worsening heart failure, and improve other outcomes.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods and results: Key demographic, clinical, and laboratory findings, along with baseline treatment, are reported and compared with those of patients in other recent clinical trials in heart failure. Compared with other recent trials, RED-HF enrolled more elderly [mean age 70 (SD 11.4) years], female (41%), and black (9%) patients. RED-HF patients more often had diabetes (46%) and renal impairment (72% had an estimated glomerular filtration rate &#60;60 mL/min/1.73 m2). Patients in RED-HF had heart failure of longer duration [5.3 (5.4) years], worse NYHA class (35% II, 63% III, and 2% IV), and more signs of congestion. Mean EF was 30% (6.8%). RED-HF patients were well treated at randomization, and pharmacological therapy at baseline was broadly similar to that of other recent trials, taking account of study-specific inclusion/exclusion criteria. Median (interquartile range) haemoglobin at baseline was 112 (106–117) g/L.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusion: The anaemic patients enrolled in RED-HF were older, moderately to markedly symptomatic, and had extensive co-morbidity.&lt;/p&gt

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Intra-abdominal measurement techniques: Is there anything new?

Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurements are essential to the diagnosis and management of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome. A variety of IAP measurement techniques have been described. The intravesicular or bladder technique remains the gold standard. This commentary reviews each of the different techniques for IAP measurement and discusses their clinical application. It also explores how IAP is affected by changes in body position, body mass index, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). IAP should be measured every 4 to 6 hours in patients with risk factors for IAH. Putting patients in the semi-recumbent position changes the IAP measurement significantly. The role of prone positioning in unstable patients with IAH remains unclear. PEEP has a small effect on IAP