Femoral venous oxygen saturation
Mixed venous oxygen saturation and Sfvo2 values are given in Table 2. Femoral venous oxygen saturation correlated poorly with Svo2 (Sfvo2 = 69.9 − [0.26 × Svo2]; R 2 = 0.03, P = 0.03) and did not correlate with CO or APP. A Bland-Altman analysis assessing the limits of agreement between Sfvo2 and Svo2 indicates a mean bias and precision of 0.1% and 24.1%, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals of 47.5 to −47.2% (plot not shown).
Summary of findings
We found that, in the absence of IAH, FVP is equal to SVCP. However, in the presence of IAH, FVP increases proportional to IAP. Positive end-expiratory pressure did not influence FVP but influenced SVCP, PAOP, and PAP. To our knowledge, this is the first study assessing the influence of IAP and PEEP on FVP and SVCP and whether Sfvo2 correlates with APP.
Can FVP be used to assess central venous pressure? The role of IAP and PEEP
Because femoral venous cannulation is generally considered safe and simple, it is widely used especially in the emergency setting and in pediatric patients (2-5). A clear correlation between SVCP and right atrial pressure has been shown previously (26, 27). However, there has been some controversy with regard to the correlation of FVP with SVCP and whether IAP influences FVP.
In our study, and in agreement with previous findings, in the absence of IAH, FVP correlated well with SVCP (Fig. 1) (4, 12, 26-29). However, in the presence of IAH, we found that FVP did not reflect SVCP as FVP was highly influenced by IAP. There are conflicting reports in the literature whether IAP influences FVP (2, 3, 11-18, 30).
One explanation for not finding the IAP to influence FVP is that the FVP reading will be dependent on the anatomical placement of the catheter tip in relation to abdominal vascular zones as previously described (30). When the tip of the femoral catheter lies within the proximity of the right atrium, the pressures will correlate well with SVCP independently of IAP (11, 30). However, when using a short catheter with the catheter tip lying in the abdomen (venous pressure upstream to IAP), there will be a close correlation between FVP and IAP (14-18, 30) but not with SVCP. Other explanations include that the studies were either underpowered or only patients with low-grade IAH were included (3, 12).
Except at baseline, PEEP only minimally (not statistically significant) influenced FVP (Table 1, Fig. 1). The nearly absent effect of PEEP on FVP in the presence of IAH can be explained by the reduced estimated transpulmonary end-expiratory pressures (PEEP − IAP), which would have approximated −7 and −15 mmHg at PEEP of 15 cmH2O (11.0 mmHg) at IAPs of 18 mmHg (grade II IAH) and 26 mmHg (grade IV IAH), respectively (22). However, in the absence of IAH and without an obstruction to flow, the FVP reflected the SVCP well and was therefore strongly influenced by PEEP.
In summary, a low FVP is likely to reflect SVCP accurately in the absence of IAH, whereas a high FVP may be the result of a raised SVCP or IAP. Positive end-expiratory pressure did not relevantly influence FVP except in the absence of IAH.
How did IAP and PEEP influence SVCP?
Superior vena cava pressure has not only been shown to poorly predict fluid responsiveness (6), but in the setting of IAH, there exists an inverse ratio between SVCP and venous return (13, 31).
In our study, SVCP was more affected by PEEP than by IAP. The pressure transmission (in mmHg) to the SVCP caused by PEEP (measured in cmH2O) was approximately 50% (Table 1, Fig. 1), which compares with other studies (32).
Superior vena cava pressure was also influenced by IAP but to a lesser degree (approximately 20%). However, the suggested linear relationship between the influence of IAP on SVCP might not truly represent the influence of IAP on SVCP because when analyzing data of previous studies, the influence of IAP on SVCP does not seem to be linear (13, 17, 31).
In summary, the SVCP was more influenced by PEEP than by IAP. The fact that both PEEP and IAP influenced SVCP needs to be considered not only in the research setting but also in clinical situations, especially when assessing the fluid status of a patient in the light of the inverse relationship between SVCP and venous return in the setting of increased PEEP and increased IAP.
How did IAP and PEEP influence PAOP and PAP?
We found that PAOP and PAP were influenced significantly by IAP and by PEEP to a degree that was comparable to how SVCP was influenced (Table 1, Figs. 1 and 2). However, the differences were not substantial, which is similar to other experimental studies (33). It is not surprising that SVCP, PAOP, and PAP were influenced similarly by PEEP and IAP, as all three pressures are measured within the intrathoracic cavity.
Can FVP be used as a surrogate measure of IAP?
Currently, measuring bladder pressure is considered the clinical criterion standard in patients with known or suspected IAH as it is easy to use and shows reasonable agreement with direct IAP measurements (7). Femoral venous pressure as a measure of IAP is not currently recommended by the WSACS because of conflicting data on the correlation between FVP and IAP (7, 19). However, we found a 1:1 relationship with strong correlation (R 2 = 0.89) between the FVP and the bladder pressure.
Why we found a bias of 5 mmHg between the FVP and the bladder pressure is not clear. This is in keeping with the literature, for example, Gudmundsson et al. (17) also found a higher FVP than bladder pressure.
We want to point out that the porcine urinary bladder is intraperitoneal as opposed to the human bladder that is extraperitoneal (17). In theory, measuring the bladder pressure as a surrogate measure of IAP is, according to the Pascal law, measuring a pressure within a closed cavity, where the pressures will be equal to any other point within the closed cavity (7). Therefore, at least in theory, the position of the bladder, whether retroperitoneal (humans) or intraperitoneal (pigs, sheep, dogs, rabbits, and rats), should not influence the pressure reading. If anything, an intraperitoneal bladder should allow a more accurate IAP measurement than a retroperitoneal bladder.
The higher FVP in comparison to the bladder pressure could be explained by the FVP in the setting of IAH, which would be a composition of the following two pressures: the mean circulatory filling pressure as described by Guyton et al. (34) in addition to the IAP or as a rule of thumb: FVP = SVCP (uninfluenced by PEEP and IAP) + IAP. However, when we tested this hypothesis, we failed to find a sufficient correlation or sufficient level of agreement on a Bland-Altman plot (not shown).
The FVP, when compared with the bladder pressure, failed to meet the WSACS recommended bias and precision of 1 and 2 mmHg, respectively (35). A number of reasons may have led to this moderate precision. First, we did not measure the pressures at end expiration as recommended by the WSACS (7). Second, the reliability of bladder pressure to correctly measure IAP has been questioned because of a high variability in measurements (19).
Indeed, most studies in humans have compared the bladder pressures with laparoscopy pressures (often poorly defined) and also found a variable degree of bias and precision. For example, Fusco et al. (36) (n = 37 patients) found a mean bias and precision of −3.8 and 4.9 mmHg (i.e., the urinary bladder pressure was 3.8 mmHg higher than the directly measured IAP), and Johna et al. (37) found a mean bias and precision of −7.9 and 3.9 mmHg, respectively. In our study, we found a comparable bias and precision (5 and 3.6 mmHg, respectively). Importantly, the bias and precision currently recommended by the WSACS would exclude the urinary bladder pressure to pass the test of validation.
In contrast to this, only a few studies compared direct with indirect measurements of IAP using a comparable pressure measurement technique and accordingly found a good level of agreement. For example, De Potter et al. (38) found in vitro a mean bias and precision of 0.1 and 0.4 mmHg; Schachtrupp et al. (39) found in a porcine model a mean bias and precision of 0.5 and 2.6 mmHg; and Iberti et al. (40) found a mean bias and precision of −0.7 and 1.7 mmHg, respectively.
In summary, FVP was only minimally influenced by PEEP in the presence of IAH. Femoral venous pressure closely correlated with bladder pressure. However, we cannot currently recommend the use of FVP as a surrogate measure of IAP, as the bias and precision are more than recommended by the WSACS. A raised FVP, however, should prompt the measurement of bladder pressure to exclude IAH. Further research investigating whether FVP can be used in the clinical setting is warranted.
Femoral venous oxygen saturation and its clinical use
Targeting Svo2 has been used successful in the early management of patients in septic shock and has been shown to improve outcome (1). There is currently no simple means to detect insufficient abdominal vascular perfusion. We therefore assessed whether the Sfvo2 would be useful in assessing the balance between oxygen delivery and oxygen demand in the setting of IAH, as this has never been investigated before. It has been suggested to target APP in patients with IAH, as this has been associated to positively influence outcome (8, 41).
In our study, the mean Sfvo2 was similar to the mean Svo2 at all IAP and PEEP settings (Table 2). However, in agreement with other studies (3, 42), we found a poor correlation (regression analysis) between Svo2 and Sfvo2 when considering all individual values (see Results). As we did not measure abdominal perfusion but only APP, we cannot exclude a possible relationship between Sfvo2 and abdominal perfusion, and this would need to be further investigated.
However, as we were unable to find a correlation between Sfvo2 and either CO or APP, we currently cannot recommend Sfvo2 as a useful measurement regardless of the presence or absence of IAH.
We used pigs in this study because pig models have been used extensively in IAH research and because the cardiorespiratory physiology of this animal is very similar to humans. However, extrapolation of animal data to clinical practice must be performed with caution, and it has to be emphasized that the anatomical position of the bladder is retroperitoneal in humans as opposed to being intraperitoneal in most experimental animals including pigs (17).
A further limitation to our study is that we measured the mean IAP instead of the end-expiratory IAP as suggested by WSACS (7). However, as all pigs received standardized mechanical ventilation, the differences between the mean and end-expiratory pressures would have affected all measurements equally and cannot explain the low level of agreement between FVP and bladder pressure.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
In conclusion, in the absence of IAH, FVP correlated well with SVCP, and in the presence of IAH, FVP correlated well with IAP. Positive end-expiratory pressure only minimally (not significantly) influenced FVP, except in the absence of IAH. Superior vena cava pressure was influenced more by PEEP than by IAP.
Because the moderate bias and precision were found to not meet the recommended limits of WSACS (35), FVP cannot currently be recommended to assess IAP, and further clinical validation of FVP to measure IAP should be encouraged. It has to be emphasized that a raised FVP should prompt the measurement of the bladder pressure.
As Sfvo2 does not correlate with Svo2, CO, and APP, we do not currently recommend the measurement of Sfvo2, irrespective of the presence or absence of IAH.
The authors thank the Department of Anesthesia of the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital for the logistical support. They also thank Dr Richard Parsons, senior lecturer in statistics, Curtin University, Perth, for statistical assistance; the Department of Medical Technology and Physics at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital; and the team of the Large Animal Facility of the University of Western Australia for technical assistance.
1. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M: Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med
2. Reda Z, Houri S, Davis AL, Baum VC: Effect of airway pressure on inferior vena cava pressure as a measure of central venous pressure in children. J Pediatr
3. Fernandez EG, Green TP, Sweeney M: Low inferior vena caval catheters for hemodynamic and pulmonary function monitoring in pediatric critical care patients. Pediatr Crit Care Med
4. Sheridan R, Nackel A, Lydon M, Petras L, Basha G: Infradiaphragmatic central venous pressures reflect supradiaphragmatic pressures in stable burn patients. J Trauma
5. Rippey JC, Pascu O, Jacobs I: Abdominal compression effectively increases the size of the common femoral vein, as measured by ultrasonography. Ann Emerg Med
6. Michard F, Teboul JL: Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest
7. Malbrain ML, Cheatham ML, Kirkpatrick A, Sugrue M, Parr M, De Waele J, Balogh Z, Leppaniemi A, Olvera C, Ivatury R, et al: Results from the International Conference of Experts on Intra-abdominal Hypertension and Abdominal Compartment Syndrome. I. Definitions. Intensive Care Med
8. Cheatham ML, Malbrain ML, Kirkpatrick A, Sugrue M, Parr M, De Waele J, Balogh Z, Leppaniemi A, Olvera C, Ivatury R, et al: Results from the International Conference of Experts on Intra-abdominal Hypertension and Abdominal Compartment Syndrome. II. Recommendations. Intensive Care Med
9. Malbrain ML, Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Bihari D, Innes R, Ranieri VM, Del Turco M, Wilmer A, Brienza N, Malcangi V, et al: Incidence and prognosis of intraabdominal hypertension in a mixed population of critically ill patients: a multiple-center epidemiological study. Crit Care Med
10. Malbrain ML, Chiumello D, Pelosi P, Wilmer A, Brienza N, Malcangi V, Bihari D, Innes R, Cohen J, Singer P, et al: Prevalence of intra-abdominal hypertension in critically ill patients: a multicentre epidemiological study. Intensive Care Med
11. Joynt GM, Gomersall CD, Buckley TA, Oh TE, Young RJ, Freebairn RC: Comparison of intrathoracic and intra-abdominal measurements of central venous pressure. Lancet
12. Ho KM, Joynt GM, Tan P: A comparison of central venous pressure and common iliac venous pressure in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. Crit Care Med
13. Kitano Y, Takata M, Sasaki N, Zhang Q, Yamamoto S, Miyasaka K: Influence of increased abdominal pressure on steady-state cardiac performance. J Appl Physiol
14. Lacey SR, Bruce J, Brooks SP, Griswald J, Ferguson W, Allen JE, Jewett TC Jr, Karp MP, Cooney DR: The relative merits of various methods of indirect measurement of intraabdominal pressure as a guide to closure of abdominal wall defects. J Pediatr Surg
15. Arfvidsson B, Eklof B, Balfour J: Iliofemoral venous pressure correlates with intraabdominal pressure in morbidly obese patients. Vasc Endovascular Surg
16. Richardson JD, Trinkle JK: Hemodynamic and respiratory alterations with increased intra-abdominal pressure. J Surg Res
17. Gudmundsson FF, Viste A, Gislason H, Svanes K: Comparison of different methods for measuring intra-abdominal pressure. Intensive Care Med
18. Barnes GE, Laine GA, Giam PY, Smith EE, Granger HJ: Cardiovascular responses to elevation of intra-abdominal hydrostatic pressure. Am J Physiol
19. Malbrain ML: Different techniques to measure intra-abdominal pressure (IAP): time for a critical re-appraisal. Intensive Care Med
20. Sharma KC, Brandstetter RD, Brensilver JM, Jung LD: Cardiopulmonary physiology and pathophysiology as a consequence of laparoscopic surgery. Chest
21. Pelosi P, Quintel M, Malbrain ML: Effect of intra-abdominal pressure on respiratory mechanics. Acta Clin Belg Suppl
22. Regli A, Hockings LE, Musk GC, Roberts B, Noffsinger B, Singh B, van Heerden PV: Commonly applied positive end-expiratory pressures do not prevent functional residual capacity decline in the setting of intra-abdominal hypertension: a pig model. Crit Care
23. Serianni R, Barash J, Bentley T, Sharma P, Fontana JL, Via D, Duhm J, Bunger R, Mongan PD: Porcine-specific hemoglobin saturation measurements. J Appl Physiol
25. Tusman G, Bohm SH, Vazquez de Anda GF, do Campo JL, Lachmann B: 'Alveolar recruitment strategy' improves arterial oxygenation during general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth
26. Walsh JT, Hildick-Smith DJ, Newell SA, Lowe MD, Satchithananda DK, Shapiro LM: Comparison of central venous and inferior vena caval pressures. Am J Cardiol
85:518-520, A11, 2000.
27. Chait HI, Kuhn MA, Baum VC: Inferior vena caval pressure reliably predicts right atrial pressure in pediatric cardiac surgical patients. Crit Care Med
28. Nahum E, Dagan O, Sulkes J, Schoenfeld T: A comparison between continuous central venous pressure measurement from right atrium and abdominal vena cava or common iliac vein. Intensive Care Med
29. Berg RA, Lloyd TR, Donnerstein RL: Accuracy of central venous pressure monitoring in the intraabdominal inferior vena cava: a canine study. J Pediatr
30. Takata M, Wise RA, Robotham JL: Effects of abdominal pressure on venous return: abdominal vascular zone conditions. J Appl Physiol
31. Vivier E, Metton O, Piriou V, Lhuillier F, Cottet-Emard JM, Branche P, Duperret S, Viale JP: Effects of increased intra-abdominal pressure on central circulation. Br J Anaesth
32. van den Berg PC, Jansen JR, Pinsky MR: Effect of positive pressure on venous return in volume-loaded cardiac surgical patients. J Appl Physiol
33. Renner J, Gruenewald M, Quaden R, Hanss R, Meybohm P, Steinfath M, Scholz J, Bein B: Influence of increased intra-abdominal pressure on fluid responsiveness predicted by pulse pressure variation and stroke volume variation in a porcine model. Crit Care Med
34. Guyton AC, Polizo D, Armstrong GG: Mean circulatory filling pressure measured immediately after cessation of heart pumping. Am J Physiol
36. Fusco MA, Martin RS, Chang MC: Estimation of intra-abdominal pressure by bladder pressure measurement: validity and methodology. J Trauma
37. Johna S, Taylor E, Brown C, Zimmerman G: Abdominal compartment syndrome: does intra-cystic pressure reflect actual intra-abdominal pressure? A prospective study in surgical patients. Crit Care (Lond)
38. De Potter TJ, Dits H, Malbrain ML: Intra- and interobserver variability during in vitro
validation of two novel methods for intra-abdominal pressure monitoring. Intensive Care Med
39. Schachtrupp A, Tons C, Fackeldey V, Hoer J, Reinges M, Schumpelick V: Evaluation of two novel methods for the direct and continuous measurement of the intra-abdominal pressure in a porcine model. Intensive Care Med
40. Iberti TJ, Lieber CE, Benjamin E: Determination of intra-abdominal pressure using a transurethral bladder catheter: clinical validation of the technique. Anesthesiology
41. Cheatham ML, White MW, Sagraves SG, Johnson JL, Block EF: Abdominal perfusion pressure: a superior parameter in the assessment of intra-abdominal hypertension. J Trauma
49:621-626, 2000; discussion 626-627.
42. Davison DL, Chawla LS, Selassie L, Jones EM, McHone KC, Vota AR, Junker C, Sateri S, Seneff MG: Femoral based central venous oxygen saturation is not a reliable substitute for subclavian/internal jugular based central venous oxygen saturation in critically ill patients. Chest
Intra-abdominal pressure; positive end-expiratory pressure; central venous pressure; bladder pressure; venous oxygen saturation