Suchergebnisse

BACKGROUND : Advances in intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement have enabled better monitoring and physiological manipulation of patients with intra-abdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome. This study aimed to determine the correlation between transvesical (TV), transgastric (TG) and direct transperitoneal (TP) IAP monitoring at different IAPs in porcine models. OBJECTIVES : To assess the statistical agreement between TV, TG and TP pressure monitoring in a pneumoperitoneum and an intestinal obstruction intra-abdominal hypertension model at different IAPs. METHODS : Fifty-nine pigs were divided into six groups: a control group (Cr; n=5), three pneumoperitoneum groups at pressures of 20 mmHg, 30 mmHg, and 40 mmHg (Pn20, Pn30, Pn40; n=40), and two intestinal-occlusion groups at pressures of 20 mmHg and 30 mmHg (Oc20, Oc30; n=14). IAP was simultaneously measured in each pig using the three methods at different times. The control group did not have any intervention to increase the IAP. Intra-class correlation was used to assess agreement between the methods. RESULTS : At pressures >20 mmHg, all three methods showed good correlation with each other (Pn20=0.87; Pn30=0.96; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.86). Correlation between TP and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.85; Pn30=0.94; Pn40=0.90; Oc20=0.78; Oc30=0.78); TP and TV (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.83; Pn30=0.95; Pn40=0.86; Oc20=0.59; Oc30=0.88); and importantly between TV and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.95; Pn30=0.98; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.91) was good. CONCLUSION : All three measurement methods showed good correlation at pressures >20 mmHg and were unaffected by the type of IAP model. These results suggest that either transvesical or transgastric pressure measurements can be used for IAP measurement when TP pressures are >20 mmHg. ; Grant from Extremadura Regional Government through the Plan Regional de Investigación de Extremadura (PRI09A161 to Minimally Invasive Surgery Center Jesús Usón). ; http://www.sajcc.org.za ; am2018 ; Statistics

Any measurement is always afflicted with some degree of uncertainty. A correct understanding of the different types of uncertainty, their naming, and their definition is of crucial importance for an appropriate use of measuring instruments. However, in perioperative and intensive care medicine, the metrological requirements for measuring instruments are poorly defined and often used spuriously. The correct use of metrological terms is also of crucial importance in validation studies. The European Union published a new directive on medical devices, mentioning that in the case of devices with a measuring function, the notified body is involved in all aspects relating to the conformity of the device with the metrological requirements. It is therefore the task of the scientific societies to establish the standards in their area of expertise. Adopting the same understandings and definitions among clinicians and scientists is obviously the first step. In this metrologic review (part 1), we list and explain the most important terms defined by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures regarding quantities and units, properties of measurements, devices for measurement, properties of measuring devices, and measurement standards, with specific examples from perioperative and intensive care medicine.

A measurement is always afflicted with some degree of uncertainty. A correct understanding of the different types of uncertainty, their naming, and their definition is of crucial importance for an appropriate use of the measuring instruments. However, in perioperative and intensive care medicine, the metrological requirements for measuring instruments are poorly defined and often used spuriously. The correct use of metrological terms is also of crucial importance in validation studies. The European Union published a new directive on medical devices, mentioning that in the case of devices with a measuring function, the notified body is involved in all aspects relating to the conformity of the device with the metrological requirements. It is therefore the task of scientific societies to establish the standards in their area of expertise. After adopting the same understandings and definitions (part 1), the different procedures for the validation of major quality criteria of measuring devices must be consensually established. In this metrologic review (part 2), we review the terms and definitions of validation, some basic processes leading to the display of an indication from a physiologic signal, and procedures for the validation of measuring instrument properties, with specific focus on perioperative and intensive care medicine including appropriate examples.