Table 2.
Sussman and colleagues [8] | Gattinoni and colleagues [7] | Torquato and colleagues [9] | Present study | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Publication year | 1991 | 1998 | 2009 | 2009 |
Patients (n) | 15 | 21 | 30 | 30 |
IAP zero reference | SP | SP | SP | MA |
IAP volume (ml) | 50 | 100 | 60 | 50 |
PEEP baseline (cmH2O) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PEEP set (cmH2O) | 15 | 15 | 10 | 12 |
ΔPEEP (cmH2O) | 15 | 15 | 10 | 12 |
ΔPEEP (mmHg) | 11 | 11 | 7.4 | 8.8 |
IAP at baseline (mmHg) | 10.8 | 10.6 ± 6 | 8.7 ± 4.5 | 11.7 ± 4.5 |
IAP at PEEP (mmHg) | 11.7 | 11.8 ± 6.3 | 12.3 ± 9.6 | 15.2 ± 5.8 |
ΔIAP (mmHg) | 0.9 | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 3.6 ± 2.6 | 3.5 ± 1.7 |
Continuous data are reported as mean ± standard deviation.
ΔPEEP = difference between the two extreme PEEP levels.
ΔIAP = IAP recorded at PEEP minus IAP at baseline.
IAP, intra-abdominal pressure; MA, midaxillary line; PEEP, positive end-expiratory pressure; SP, symphysis pubis.