ArticleScientific reports2022
Preliminary study of reliability of transcutaneous sensors in measuring intraabdominal pressure.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microwave Radar Sensing for Non-Invasive Intra-Abdominal Pressure Monitoring: A Simulation-Based Analysis with Phantom Testing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mechanomedicine in digestive surgery: a theranostic framework integrating mechanical diagnostics and therapeutic modulation across the perioperative continuum.Theranostics · 2026Review
- Variation and accuracy of intra-abdominal pressure measurement in different body positions: a prospective study.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2025Article
- Non-invasive and continuous intra-abdominal pressure assessment using MC sensors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Feasibility and accuracy of continuous intraabdominal pressure monitoring with a capsular device in human pilot trial.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2025Article
- The development, feasibility and credibility of intra-abdominal pressure measurement techniques: A scoping review.PloS one · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the TraumaGuard Balloon-in-Balloon Catheter Design for Intra-Abdominal Pressure Monitoring: Insights from Pig and Human Cadaver Studies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early recognition of elevated intraabdominal pressure (IAP) in critically ill patients is essential, since it can result in abdominal compartment syndrome, which is a life-threatening condition. The measurement of intravesical pressure is currently considered the gold standard for IAP assessment. Alternative methods have been proposed, where IAP assessment is based on measuring abdominal wall tension, which reflects the pressure in the abdominal cavity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using patch-like transcutaneous sensors to estimate changes in IAP, which could facilitate the monitoring of IAP in clinical practice. This study was performed with 30 patients during early postoperative care. All patients still had an indwelling urinary catheter postoperatively. Four wearable sensors were attached to the outer surface of the abdominal region to detect the changes in abdominal wall tension. Additionally, surface EMG was used to monitor the activity of the abdominal muscles. The thickness of the subcutaneous tissue was measured with ultrasound. Patients performed 4 cycles of the Valsalva manoeuvre, with a resting period in between (the minimal resting period was 30 s, with a prolongation as necessary to ensure that the fluid level in the measuring system had equilibrated). The IAP was estimated with intravesical pressure measurements during all resting periods and all Valsalva manoeuvres, while the sensors continuously measured changes in abdominal wall tension. The association between the subcutaneous thickness and tension changes on the surface and the intraabdominal pressure was statistically significant, but a large part of the variability was explained by individual patient factors. As a consequence, the predictions of IAP using transcutaneous sensors were not biased, but they were quite variable. The specificity of detecting intraabdominal pressure of 20 mmHg and above is 88%, with an NPV of 96%, while its sensitivity and PPV are currently far lower. There are inherent limitations of the chosen preliminary study design that directly caused the low sensitivity of our method as well as the poor agreement with the gold standard method; in spite of that, we have shown that these sensors have the potential to be used to monitor intraabdominal pressure. We are planning a study that would more closely resemble the intended clinical use and expect it to show more consistent results with a far smaller error.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.