Abdominal decompression for abdominal compartment syndrome in critically ill patients: a retrospective study

Background. The abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) refers to organ dysfunction that may occur as a result of increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). Successful management may require abdominal decompression and temporary abdominal closure (TAC). The aim of this study was to analyze the characteristics of patients requiring abdominal decompression, to describe the methods used for TAC, and to study the outcome of these patients. Methods. A series of critically ill patients who required abdominal decompression for ACS between January 2000 and March 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Age, gender, severity of organ dysfunction before decompression and the cause of ACS as well as the type of abdominal closure system and length of ICU-stay were recorded. Definitive abdominal closure and in-hospital mortality were the main outcome parameters. Results. Eighteen patients with primary ACS and 6 with secondary ACS required decompressive laparotomy. Patients ages ranged from 18 to 89 years (mean 50.7). The median preoperative IAP was 26mmHg, and IAP decreased to 13mmHg after decompressive laparotomy. Organ function, as quantified by the SOFA scoring system, improved significantly after the intervention. Eight patients had immediate primary fascial closure after the decompressive procedure and 16 patients required TAC. The majority of the survivors underwent planned ventral hernia repair at a later stage. The mean length of stay in the ICU was 23 (+/- 16) days. Overall, fifteen patients survived (63%). Conclusions. Decompressive laparotomy was effective in reducing IAP and was associated with an improvement in organ function. In most of the patients, the abdomen could not be closed after decompression, and fascial repair was delayed

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

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

Comparison of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA)-Derived Parameters in Healthy Volunteers and Critically Ill Patients

Objective: To compare bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-derived parameters in healthy volunteers and critically ill patients and to assess its prognostic value in an ICU patient cohort. Design: Retrospective, observational data analysis. Setting: Single centre, tertiary-level ICU (Ziekenhuis Netwerk Antwerpen, ZNA Stuivenberg Hospital). Patients: 101 patients and 101 healthy subjects, participants of International Fluid Academy Days. Measurements and main results: Compared to healthy volunteers, both male and female ICU patients had significantly higher values for total body water (TBW), extracellular water (ECW), extracellular fluid (ECF), plasma, and interstitial fluid volumes. The phase angle was significantly lower and the malnutrition index was significantly higher in ICU patients, regardless of gender. Non-survivors in the ICU had significantly higher extracellular water content (ECW, 50.7 ± 5.1 vs. 48.9 ± 4.3%, p = 0.047) and accordingly significantly lower intracellular water (ICW, 49.2 ± 5.1 vs. 51.1 ± 4.3%, p = 0.047). The malnutrition index was also significantly higher in non-survivors compared to survivors (0.94 ± 0.17 vs. 0.87 ± 0.16, p = 0.048), as was the capillary leak index (ECW/ICW). Conclusions: Compared to healthy volunteers, this study observed a higher malnutrition index and TBW in ICU patients with an accumulation of fluids in the extracellular compartment. ICU non-survivors showed similar results, indicating that ICU patients and a fortiori non-survivors are generally overhydrated, with increased TBW and ECW, and more undernourished, as indicated by a higher malnutrition index

Outcome in patients perceived as receiving excessive care across different ethical climates: a prospective study in 68 intensive care units in Europe and the USA

Purpose: Whether the quality of the ethical climate in the intensive care unit (ICU) improves the identification of patients receiving excessive care and affects patient outcomes is unknown. Methods: In this prospective observational study, perceptions of excessive care (PECs) by clinicians working in 68 ICUs in Europe and the USA were collected daily during a 28-day period. The quality of the ethical climate in the ICUs was assessed via a validated questionnaire. We compared the combined endpoint (death, not at home or poor quality of life at 1 year) of patients with PECs and the time from PECs until written treatment-limitation decisions (TLDs) and death across the four climates defined via cluster analysis. Results: Of the 4747 eligible clinicians, 2992 (63%) evaluated the ethical climate in their ICU. Of the 321 and 623 patients not admitted for monitoring only in ICUs with a good (n = 12, 18%) and poor (n = 24, 35%) climate, 36 (11%) and 74 (12%), respectively were identified with PECs by at least two clinicians. Of the 35 and 71 identified patients with an available combined endpoint, 100% (95% CI 90.0–1.00) and 85.9% (75.4–92.0) (P = 0.02) attained that endpoint. The risk of death (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.20–2.92) or receiving a written TLD (HR 2.32, CI 1.11–4.85) in patients with PECs by at least two clinicians was higher in ICUs with a good climate than in those with a poor one. The differences between ICUs with an average climate, with (n = 12, 18%) or without (n = 20, 29%) nursing involvement at the end of life, and ICUs with a poor climate were less obvious but still in favour of the former. Conclusion: Enhancing the quality of the ethical climate in the ICU may improve both the identification of patients receiving excessive care and the decision-making process at the end of life