Current recognition and management of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome among tertiary Chinese intensive care physicians

Current recognition and management of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome among tertiary Chinese intensive care physicians first-author †E-mail:jiancangzhou@hotmail.com †E-mail:jiancangzhou@hotmail.com jiancangzhou@hotmail.com Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310016, China This survey was designed to clarify the current understanding and clinical management of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH)/abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) among intensive care physicians in tertiary Chinese hospitals. A postal twenty-question questionnaire was sent to 141 physicians in different intensive care units (ICUs). A total of 108 (76.6%) questionnaires were returned. Among these, three quarters worked in combined medical-surgical ICUs and nearly 80% had primary training in internal or emergency medicine. Average ICU beds, annual admission, ICU length of stay, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score, and mortality were 18.2 beds, 764.5 cases, 8.3 d, 19.4, and 21.1%, respectively. Of the respondents, 30.6% never measured intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). Although the vast majority of the ICUs adopted the exclusively transvesicular method, the overwhelming majority (88.0%) only measured IAP when there was a clinical suspicion of IAH/ACS and only 29.3% measured either often or routinely. Moreover, 84.0% used the wrong priming saline volume while 88.0% zeroed at reference points which were not in consistence with the standard method for IAP monitoring recommended by the World Society of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome. ACS was suspected mainly when there was a distended abdomen (92%), worsening oliguria (80%), and increased ventilatory support requirement (68%). Common causes for IAH/ACS were “third-spacing from massive volume resuscitation in different settings” (88%), “intra-abdominal bleeding”, and “liver failure with ascites” (52% for both). Though 60% respondents would recommend surgical decompression when the IAP exceeded 25 mmHg, accompanied by signs of organ dysfunction, nearly three quarters of respondents preferred diuresis and dialysis. A total of 68% of respondents would recommend paracentesis in the treatment for ACS. In conclusion, urgent systematic education is absolutely necessary for most intensive care physicians in China to help to establish clear diagnostic criteria and appropriate management for these common, but life-threatening, diseases. Questionnaire Intra-abdominal pressure Intra-abdominal hypertension Decompression laparotomy Abdominal compartment syndrome Introduction 1 Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) is defined by a sustained or repeated pathologic elevation of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) ≥12 mmHg, whereas abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is defined as a sustained IAP > 20 mmHg (with or without an abdominal perfusion pressure < 60 mmHg) associated with new organ dysfunction/failure (Malbrain et al., 2006b 2006b ). IAH/ACS can result from multiple causes, such as abdominal or retroperitoneal bleeding, liver transplantation, massive fluid resuscitation for extra-abdominal trauma, and severe acute pancreatitis. A multicenter prevalence prospective study of IAH in 13 intensive care units (ICUs) from Belgium, Italy, Austria, Israel, Brazil, and Australia, found the prevalence of IAH to be 32.1% and the prevalence of ACS to be 4.2% on admission (Malbrain et al., 2005 2005 ). The presence of IAH on admission to ICU has been associated with severe organ dysfunction during the ICU stay, and the development of IAH during an ICU stay is an independent predictor of mortality (Malbrain et al., 2005 2005 ). Due to the possible impairment of every system and the high prevalence and incidence of IAH, some have suggested that IAP be measured in all patients after intensive care admission, with ongoing monitoring for those at high risk (Malbrain, 2004b 2004b ). Despite the ever-increasing interest and volume of publications concerning this syndrome, recent surveys have revealed a wide range in the thresholds for definition, functional indications, and management of ACS (Malbrain et al., 2006a 2006a ; Kimball et al., 2007 2007 ). It remains all too frequently underrecognized and underappreciated, and routine IAP monitoring has not been established in all ICUs (Malbrain et al., 2009 2009 ). To our knowledge, few studies of IAH or ACS are being undertaken in China, and only several related articles either in Chinese or English were found on PubMed up to the end of 2009. What is worse, many physicians, including intensivists and surgeons, scarcely know or even completely lack knowledge for management of IAH/ACS, which may delay timely intervention and contribute to excessive patient resuscitation. Therefore, the primary goal of this survey was to provide a representative picture of the current awareness and management of IAH and ACS among intensive care physicians in China, as well as to explore the overall characteristics of ICUs in tertiary hospitals in China. Materials and methods 1 From the participant list of the 3rd Chinese National Critical Care Conference held in July 2008, Hangzhou, China, 141 physicians from different tertiary hospitals, who would be expected to treat patients susceptible to ACS, were randomly selected. Physicians from pediatric ICUs or traditional Chinese medicine hospitals were excluded. A postal twenty-question questionnaire (see Appendix) and a prepaid addressed envelope were sent to them with the address on the participant list in early 2010. The survey assessed overall characteristics of ICU, general knowledge, causes, current methods for diagnosis, and its subsequent treatment for ACS. A reminder was sent to non-respondents within a few weeks. The total survey period was from February 2010 to April 2010. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Version 11.0 for Windows. Data were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and presented as mean±standard deviation (SD). Results 1 Completed questionnaires were received from 108 of the 141 physicians surveyed (76.6% response rate). To our surprise, nearly one third (30.6%, n =33) of ICUs never measured IAP in their intensive care practice. Among which, 36.4% and 27.3% argued “Do not know how to interpret the results obtained” or “Never admit any patients with intra-abdominal hypertension” respectively as their reason not to measure the IAP. Respondent demographics 2 Of the respondents, 75.0% ( n =81) worked in combined medical-surgical ICUs, followed by 11.1% ( n =12) in a medical ICU, 8.3% ( n =9) in a surgical ICU, 2.8% ( n =3) for neurological ICU, and 2.8% ( n =3) for “other”. When it came to their primary training, 19.4% ( n =21) had primary training in surgery, 36.1% ( n =39) in medicine, 38.9% ( n =42) in emergency medicine, and 5.6% ( n =6) in anesthesia. In terms of length of working as an intensive care physician, respondents had worked in ICUs for a median 8.0 years (range 2–23 years). Overall characteristics of responded ICUs 2 In terms of departments referring to ICU admission, 61.1% ( n =66) cited emergency department, followed by the respiratory department at 47.2% ( n =51). General surgery department took the third position at 38.9% ( n =42) and ranked fourth was the neurosurgery department, nearly 36.1% ( n =39). Manpower, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II scores, ICU length of stay, and mortality rates in the surveyed ICUs are shown in Table 1 1 . Of the deceased patients, 42.2% were discharged for financial reasons and were expected to die within 24 h. ICU: intensive care unit; APACHE: acute physiology and chronic health evaluation; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval Variable Value Hospital beds 1 432.4±655.6 ICU beds 18.2±8.6 Number of doctors 10.6±5.3 Number of nurses 36.3±19.0 Number of admissions 764.5±534.8 APACHE II score 19.4±3.8 ICU length of stay (d) 8.3±4.9 ICU mortality (%) 21.1 (95% CI: 15.6%–26.6%) Recognition and diagnosis of IAH/ACS 2 Of those ICUs that measured IAP, the overwhelming majority (88.0%, n =66) only measured IAP when there was a clinical suspicion of IAH and ACS. A small number of ICUs (8.0%, n =6) measured IAP on admitted patients after emergency laparotomy, whereas only 4.0% ( n =3) measured IAP routinely in those who underwent massive fluid resuscitation. For those monitored IAP, the transvesicular route (100%, n =75) with supine position (97.3%, n =73) was used almost exclusively, while a fractional 6.7% mentioned inferior vena cava route. However, there was no general consensus on the volume of saline that should be instilled, or regarding the zero reference points for the measurement. Only one sixth (16.0%, n =12) instilled < 25 ml, nearly half (46.7%, n =35) instilled > 50 ml, but < 100 ml, whilst 21.3% ( n =16) used > 25 ml, but ≤50 ml, and 16.0% ( n =12) for ≥100 ml. Turning to zero reference points, the story is similar, only 12.0% ( n =9) zeroed at the midaxillary line at the level of the iliac crest, whereas the vast majority (68.0%, n =51) adopted the symphysis pubis and 20.0% ( n =15) used the phlebostatic axis. Among those who measured IAP, the vast majority (70.7%, n =53) measured IAP occasionally, only 29.3% ( n =22) measured either often or routinely. When asked to quantify the number of ACS cases during 2009, 44% ( n =33) found 1–3 cases, 16% ( n =12) found 4–7 cases, 8% ( n =6) found 8–10 cases, and 32% ( n =24) found more than 10 cases. Among those who measured IAP, besides the high agreement (92%) on distended abdomen, ACS was suspected when there was a worsening oliguria (80%), increased ventilatory support requirement (68%), hypotension (60%), increased inotropic agents (48%), and worsening acidosis (44%). Clinical causes of IAH/ACS 2 As for the reasons given for the occurrence of ACS, “third-spacing from massive volume resuscitation in different settings (post-operation, trauma, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, pancreatitis)” was the commonest (88%) reason cited by the surveyed physicians. On the other hand, equally 52% respondents chose “intra-abdominal bleeding” and “liver failure with ascites” as the most common causes for IAH/ACS, whilst only 12% mentioned “burn” as the reason. Treatment intervention 2 Though 60% ( n =45) would recommend surgical decompression when the IAP exceeded 25 mmHg, accompanied by signs of organ dysfunction, there was significant variation across the respondents who measured IAP in the treatment of IAH and ACS. Nearly three quarters of respondents preferred diuresis and dialysis (72% for both), followed by paracentesis (68%) and decompression laparotomy (56%). However, 10.7% ( n =8) stated that surgeons in their hospitals would never decompress patients with ACS. It was interesting that less than one third (28%, 28%, and 12%, respectively) mentioned “pressors/inotropes”, “fluid/blood products”, and “sedation and neuromuscular blockade agents” for the treatment of the syndrome. Discussion 1 Owing to the exponentially increased interest and study in IAH and ACS over the past decade, the deleterious effect of IAH and ACS had been disclosed and recognized recently. IAH results in multiorgan dysfunction, including the cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, splanchnic, and central nervous systems, with respiratory and renal dysfunction being among the most prominent effects (Zhou et al., 2010 2010 ). Patients with IAH have a significantly higher ICU-mortality (37.9% vs. 19.1%), 28-d (48.4% vs. 27.8%) and 90-d mortalities (53.7% vs. 35.8%), compared with the patients without the syndrome (Reintam et al., 2008 2008 ). Moreover, hospital mortality was proportional to IAH level: it was 6.7% when IAP was 12–15 mmHg, 25.5% at 16–20 mmHg, and the mortality rocketed to more than 75.0% if IAP reached higher than 20 mmHg (Parsak et al., 2008 2008 ). Under this circumstance, in 2004, the World Society of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome (WSACS; http://www.wsacs.org http://www.wsacs.org ) was founded by a group of international physicians and surgeons who recognized the need for a cohesive approach to promoting research, fostering education, early recognition, and improving the survival of patients with IAH and/or ACS (Malbrain et al., 2009 2009 ). The WSACS advocates monitoring IAP in patients with risk factors for IAH/ACS. However, despite the ever-increasing interest and volume of publications concerning IAH/ACS, it remains all too frequently underrecognized and undertreated. Surveys from USA (Kimball et al., 2006 2006 ) and UK (Tiwari et al., 2006 2006 ) very recently demonstrated medical training and physicians’ knowledge for IAH/ACS varied enormously, and a significant percentage of intensivists may be unaware of current approaches to management of IAH/ACS. In order to standardize the definition, clinical practice, and future research, WSACS published consensus definitions and management guidelines in 2006 and 2007 (Malbrain et al., 2006b 2006b ; Cheatham et al., 2007 2007 ). Nevertheless, in our 46-bed tertiary ICU, many intensivists remained unaware of the current definition of IAH/ACS, let alone the strategy to treat this syndrome. Therefore, we initiated this survey at the end of 2009. Unfortunately, our worry that this phenomenon is not a single center problem, but a national one in China, is finally confirmed by the present survey. In our survey, 30.6% of the respondents never monitored IAP with the majority unsurprisingly excusing that they “Do not know how to measure IAP” or “Do not know how to interpret the results obtained”. Early identification and appropriate staging of patients at risk are fundamental for the effective management of patients with IAH/ACS. Although direct intraperitoneal pressure measurement is the gold standard for IAP measurement, a variety of intermittent methods have been suggested, among which the transvesicular technique has achieved the most widespread adoption worldwide, due to its simplicity and minimal cost (Malbrain, 2004a 2004a ). Several key principles had undergone intensive clinical validation, though the technique seems promising. With respect to the effect of instillation volume on intra-bladder pressure as an estimation of IAP, large volumes of saline, as much as 100 to 250 ml, may lead to the overestimation of IAP (Malbrain and Deeren, 2006 2006 ; Vallee et al., 2010 2010 ), while a minimal volume as low as 2 to 10 ml is sufficient for the IAP signal transduction (de Waele et al., 2006b 2006b ; de Laet et al., 2008b 2008b ). In terms of zero reference points for IAP measurement, various levels have been suggested such as the symphysis pubis, the phlebostatic axis, and the midaxillary line, each of which may result in different IAP measurements within the same patient. Therefore, WSACS now recommends limiting the amount of priming saline to no more than 25 ml and that the reference should zero at the level of the midaxillary line for the intermittent IAP measurement via the bladder (Malbrain et al., 2006b 2006b ). As shown in this survey, though the vast majority of the ICUs adopted the exclusively transvesicular method to measure IAP, unfortunately, 84% used the wrong volume of priming saline, while 88% zeroed at incorrect reference points, despite the standard IAP monitoring method recommended by the WSACS in 2006. Not surprisingly, when it comes to the causes for IAH/ACS, our survey showed results similar to those published previously (Malbrain et al., 2006b 2006b ; Tiwari et al., 2006 2006 ), i.e., trauma, pancreatitis with massive fluid resuscitation, and liver cirrhosis with ascites. In massive bleeding, traditional aggressive crystalloid resuscitation is the most common risk factor associated with ACS, with a net positive fluid balance of 5 L over 24 h, resulting in 85% of the patients developing IAH in a recent study (Daugherty et al., 2007 2007 ). Shock plus massive crystalloid infusion is associated with systemic capillary leak and edema, resulting in decreased abdominal wall compliance and increased intra-abdominal and intra-luminal fluid contents, and even a vicious self-propagating cycle (Rizoli et al., 2010 2010 ). The diagnosis of ACS needs a high index of suspicion. Fortunately, for most respondents in our survey, early signs of organ dysfunction, like worsening oliguria, increased ventilatory support requirement, distended abdomen, hypotension, and worsening acidosis, alerted physicians to measure IAP immediately and subsequently, which was prompted for the timely recognition and diagnosis of ACS. Although WSACS has described a graded approach to the management of IAH/ACS, which can be used to avoid the need for surgical decompression in many patients, surgical abdominal decompression has long been the standard treatment for the patient who develops ACS (de Waele et al., 2006a 2006a ; Cheatham et al., 2007 2007 ; de Laet et al., 2008a 2008a ). However, many things should also be taken into consideration with decompressive laparotomy, because the decompression could bring about massive intra-abdominal bleeding, persisting open abdomen, and subsequent extensive abdominal wall reconstruction. In our survey, similar to others (Ravishankar and Hunter, 2005 2005 ; Tiwari et al., 2006 2006 ), many respondents emphasized that they had very low surgical decompression rates even after the established diagnosis of ACS, because surgeons were reluctant to operate on those already very ill patients. The management of “open abdomen” and other complications including sepsis was challenging, because of a lack of awareness of the evolving management on the ACS for surgeons. Given the fact that hospitals we recruited for the survey are teaching and tertiary centers, doctors were generally expected to have a better education background and better access to advanced medical information. This would likely result in an overrepresentation of physicians’ experience of IAH/ACS management. Therefore, the actual situation in China would be even worse than that shown in our survey. Urgent systematic education is necessary for most intensive care physicians in China in order to help establish clear diagnostic criteria and appropriate management for these common, but life-threatening, diseases. References ML Cheatham , ML Malbrain , A Kirkpatrick , M Sugrue , M Parr , J de Waele , Z Balogh , A Leppäniemi , C Olvera , R Ivatury , 等 . Results from the international conference of experts on intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. II. Recommendations . Intensive Care Med , 2007 . 33 ( 6 ): 951 - 962 . 17377769 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0592-4 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-007-0592-4 . Results from the international conference of experts on intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. II. Recommendations EL Daugherty , H Liang , D Taichman , J Hansen-Flaschen , BD Fuchs . Abdominal compartment syndrome is common in medical intensive care unit patients receiving large-volume resuscitation . J Intensive Care Med , 2007 . 22 ( 5 ): 294 - 299 . 17895487 DOI: 10.1177/0885066607305247 http://doi.org/10.1177/0885066607305247 . Abdominal compartment syndrome is common in medical intensive care unit patients receiving large-volume resuscitation I de Laet , M Ravyts , W Vidts , J Valk , JJ de Waele , ML Malbrain . Current insights in intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome: open the abdomen and keep it open! . Langenbecks Arch Surg , 2008 . 393 ( 6 ): 833 - 847 . 18560882 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-008-0347-x http://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-008-0347-x . Current insights in intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome: open the abdomen and keep it open! I de Laet , E Hoste , JJ de Waele . Transvesical intra-abdominal pressure measurement using minimal instillation volumes: how low can we go? . Intensive Care Med , 2008 . 34 ( 4 ): 746 - 750 . 18227998 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-007-0985-4 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-007-0985-4 . Transvesical intra-abdominal pressure measurement using minimal instillation volumes: how low can we go? JJ de Waele , EA Hoste , ML Malbrain . Decompressive laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome—a critical analysis . Crit Care , 2006 . 10 ( 2 ): R51 16569255 DOI: 10.1186/cc4870 http://doi.org/10.1186/cc4870 . Decompressive laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome—a critical analysis JJ de Waele , P Pletinckxp , S Blot , E Hoste . Saline volume in transvesical intra-abdominal pressure measurement: enough is enough . Intensive Care Med , 2006 . 32 ( 3 ): 455 - 459 . 16477411 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-005-0062-9 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-0062-9 . Saline volume in transvesical intra-abdominal pressure measurement: enough is enough EJ Kimball , MD Rollins , MC Mone , HJ Hansen , GK Baraghoshi , C Johnston , ES Day , PR Jackson , M Payne , RG Barton . Survey of intensive care physicians on the recognition and management of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome . Crit Care Med , 2006 . 34 ( 9 ): 2340 - 2348 . 16878034 DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000233874.88032.1C http://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000233874.88032.1C . Survey of intensive care physicians on the recognition and management of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome EJ Kimball , W Kim , ML Cheatham , ML Malbrain . Clinical awareness of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome in 2007 . Acta Clin Belg , 2007 . ( Suppl. 1 ): 66 - 73 . . Clinical awareness of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome in 2007 ML Malbrain . Different techniques to measure intra-abdominal pressure (IAP): time for a critical re-appraisal . Intensive Care Med , 2004 . 30 ( 3 ): 357 - 371 . 14730376 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-003-2107-2 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-003-2107-2 . Different techniques to measure intra-abdominal pressure (IAP): time for a critical re-appraisal ML Malbrain . Is it wise not to think about intra-abdominal hypertension in the ICU? . Curr Opin Crit Care , 2004 . 10 ( 2 ): 132 - 145 . 15075724 DOI: 10.1097/00075198-200404000-00010 http://doi.org/10.1097/00075198-200404000-00010 . Is it wise not to think about intra-abdominal hypertension in the ICU? ML Malbrain , DH Deeren . Effect of bladder volume on measured intravesical pressure: a prospective cohort study . Crit Care , 2006 . 10 ( 4 ): R98 16934130 DOI: 10.1186/cc4962 http://doi.org/10.1186/cc4962 . Effect of bladder volume on measured intravesical pressure: a prospective cohort study ML Malbrain , D Chiumello , P Pelosi , D Bihari , R Innes , VM Ranieri , M Del Turco , A Wilmer , N Brienza , V Malcangi , 等 . Incidence and prognosis of intraabdominal hypertension in a mixed population of critically ill patients: a multiple-center epidemiological study . Crit Care Med , 2005 . 33 ( 2 ): 315 - 322 . 15699833 DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000153408.09806.1B http://doi.org/10.1097/01.CCM.0000153408.09806.1B . Incidence and prognosis of intraabdominal hypertension in a mixed population of critically ill patients: a multiple-center epidemiological study ML Malbrain , ML Cheatham , A Kirkpatrick , M Sugrue , J de Waele , C Olvera , R Ivatury . Abdominal compartment syndrome: it’s time to pay attention! . Intensive Care Med , 2006 . 32 ( 11 ): 1912 - 1914 . 16896853 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-006-0303-6 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0303-6 . Abdominal compartment syndrome: it’s time to pay attention! ML Malbrain , ML Cheatham , A Kirkpatrick , M Sugrue , M Parr , J de Waele , Z Balogh , A Leppäniemi , C Olvera , R Ivatury , 等 . Results from the international conference of experts on intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. I. Definitions . Intensive Care Med , 2006 . 32 ( 11 ): 1722 - 1732 . 16967294 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-006-0349-5 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0349-5 . Results from the international conference of experts on intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome. I. Definitions ML Malbrain , IE de Laet , JJ de Waele . IAH/ACS: the rationale for surveillance . World J Surg , 2009 . 33 ( 6 ): 1110 - 1115 . 19373508 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-009-0039-x http://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-009-0039-x . IAH/ACS: the rationale for surveillance CK Parsak , G Seydaoglu , G Sakman , TO Acarturk , E Karakoc , I Hanta , AH Alparslan , S Satar . Abdominal compartment syndrome: current problems and new strategies . World J Surg , 2008 . 32 ( 1 ): 13 - 19 . 18026790 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-007-9286-x http://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9286-x . Abdominal compartment syndrome: current problems and new strategies N Ravishankar , J Hunter . Measurement of intra-abdominal pressure in intensive care units in the United Kingdom: a national postal questionnaire study . Br J Anaesth , 2005 . 94 ( 6 ): 763 - 766 . 15764629 DOI: 10.1093/bja/aei117 http://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aei117 . Measurement of intra-abdominal pressure in intensive care units in the United Kingdom: a national postal questionnaire study A Reintam , P Parm , R Kitus , H Kern , J Starkopf . Primary and secondary intra-abdominal hypertension—different impact on ICU outcome . Intensive Care Med , 2008 . 34 ( 9 ): 1624 - 1631 . 18446319 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-008-1134-4 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1134-4 . Primary and secondary intra-abdominal hypertension—different impact on ICU outcome S Rizoli , A Mamtani , S Scarpelini , AW Kirkpatrick . Abdominal compartment syndrome in trauma resuscitation . Curr Opin Anaesthesiol , 2010 . 23 ( 2 ): 251 - 257 . 19996741 DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e3283358a0f http://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0b013e3283358a0f . Abdominal compartment syndrome in trauma resuscitation A Tiwari , F Myint , G Hamilton . Recognition and management of abdominal compartment syndrome in the United Kingdom . Intensive Care Med , 2006 . 32 ( 6 ): 906 - 909 . 16601965 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-006-0106-9 http://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0106-9 . Recognition and management of abdominal compartment syndrome in the United Kingdom F Vallee , C Dupas , V Feuvrier , A Mebazaa , F Ferre , A Mari , M Genestal , O Fourcade . Intra-abdominal pressure measurement method via the urinary-tube: bedside validation of a biomechanical model integrating urine column height and bladder urinary volume . Ann Surg , 2010 . 251 ( 1 ): 127 - 132 . 19864939 DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b5919b http://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b5919b . Intra-abdominal pressure measurement method via the urinary-tube: bedside validation of a biomechanical model integrating urine column height and bladder urinary volume JC Zhou , QP Xu , KH Pan , C Mao , CW Jin . Effect of increased intra-abdominal pressure and decompressive laparotomy on aerated lung volume distribution . J Zhejiang Univ-Sci B , 2010 . 11 ( 5 ): 378 - 385 . 20443216 DOI: 10.1631/jzus.B0900270 http://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B0900270 . Effect of increased intra-abdominal pressure and decompressive laparotomy on aerated lung volume distribution The authors would like to thank the physicians who sent back their replies. The authors are also indebted to Dr. John REEVES, Director of ICU, Cabrini Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, and Dr. Wei-hang HU, intensive care physician in Hangzhou First Municipal Hospital, Hangzhou, China, for their valuable advice in the design of the survey. 10.1631/jzus.B1000185 Project supported by the Medical Scientific Research Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China (No. 2010KYA109), and the Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of Zhejiang Province, China (No. 2010ZB080) 2010-05-19 2011-01-06 2010-08-10 2022-01-05 Copyright © Zhejiang University and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011 2011 Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B (Biomedicine and Biotechnology) 02 12