Search

The mean systemic pressure analog (Pmsa), calculated from running hemodynamic data, estimates mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP). This post hoc study used data from a porcine veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) model [n = 9; Sus scrofa domesticus; ES breed (Schweizer Edelschwein)] with eight experimental conditions; Euvolemia [a volume state where ECMO flow produced normal mixed venous saturation (SVO2) without vascular collapse]; three levels of increasing norepinephrine infusion (Vasoconstriction 1-3); status after stopping norepinephrine (Post Vasoconstriction); and three steps of volume expansion (10 mL/kg crystalloid bolus) (Volume Expansion 1-3). In each condition, Pmsa and a "reduced-pump-speed-Pmsa" (Pmsared) were calculated from baseline and briefly reduced pump speeds, respectively. We calculated agreement for absolute values (per condition) and changes (between consecutive conditions) of Pmsa and Pmsared, against MSFP at zero ECMO flow. Euvolemia venous return driving pressure was 5.1��������2.0 mmHg. Bland-Altman analysis for Pmsa vs. MSFP (all conditions; 72 data pairs) showed bias (confidence interval) 0.5 (0.1-0.9) mmHg; limits of agreement (LoA) -2.7 to 3.8 mmHg. Bias for ��Pmsa vs. ��MSFP (63 data pairs): 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.6) mmHg, LoA -3.2 to 3.6 mmHg. Bias for Pmsared vs. MSFP (72 data pairs): 0.0 (-0.3 to -0.3) mmHg; LoA -2.3 to 2.4 mmHg. Bias for ��Pmsared vs. ��MSFP (63 data pairs) was 0.2 (-0.1 to 0.4) mmHg; LoA -1.8 to 2.1 mmHg. In conclusion, during veno-arterial ECMO, under clinically relevant levels of vasoconstriction and volume expansion, Pmsa accurately estimated absolute and changing values of MSFP, with low between-method precision. The within-method precision of Pmsa was excellent, with a least significant change of 0.15 mmHg.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study ever to validate the mean systemic pressure analog (Pmsa) against the reference mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP) determined at full arterio-venous pressure equilibrium. Using a porcine ECMO model with clinically relevant levels of vasoconstriction and volume expansion, we showed that Pmsa accurately estimated absolute and changing values of MSFP, with a poor between-method precision. The within-method precision of Pmsa was excellent.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW To summarize recent evidence regarding the diagnosis of acute gastrointestinal dysfunction and enteral feeding intolerance, and relationship of these to development of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, during critical illness. RECENT FINDINGS Novel gastric feeding tubes that attenuate gastroesophageal regurgitation or facilitate continuous monitoring of gastric motility have been developed. The definition of enteral feeding intolerance remains controversial, which may be resolved using a consensus process. A novel scoring system for gastrointestinal dysfunction (GIDS - GastroIntestinal Dysfunction Score) was recently developed but it is not yet validated or tested to evaluate the effect of any interventions. Studies of biomarkers to identify gastrointestinal dysfunction have yet to yield a suitable biomarker for daily clinical use. SUMMARY The assessment of gastrointestinal function in critically ill patients continues to rely on complex daily clinical assessment. Scoring systems, consensus definitions and novel technology appear the most promising tools and interventions to improve patient care.