Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Intra-abdominal pressure during endoscopic full-thickness resection comparing manual and automatic control insufflation: a block-randomized porcine study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Intra-abdominal pressure during endoscopic full-thickness resection comparing manual and automatic control insufflation: a block-randomized porcine study
Do you wish to request the book?
Intra-abdominal pressure during endoscopic full-thickness resection comparing manual and automatic control insufflation: a block-randomized porcine study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Intra-abdominal pressure during endoscopic full-thickness resection comparing manual and automatic control insufflation: a block-randomized porcine study
2020
Overview
Background and study aimsAn automatic carbon dioxide (CO2) insufflating system (SPACE) was developed to stabilize intra-lumenal pressure (ILP) during endoscopic interventions. This study investigated whether SPACE could improve the control and monitoring of extra-lumenal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) after establishing a perforation during endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) of the gastric wall in porcine models.Materials and methodsAfter first establishing the optimal preset pressure for gastric EFTR in four pigs, we compared IAP dynamics during EFTR between manual insufflation and SPACE using a block-randomized study (n = 10). IAP was percutaneously monitored and plotted on a timeline graph every 5 s. The maximal IAP and the area under the IAP curve exceeding 10 mmHg (AUC≥10 mmHg) were compared between groups, with the agreement between IAP and endolumenally monitored ILP also analyzed for animals in the SPACE group.ResultsIn the first study, 8 mmHg was identified as the most preferable preset pressure after establishment of the perforation. In the randomized study, the mean maximal IAP in the SPACE group was significantly lower than that in the manual insufflation group (11.0 ± 2.0 mmHg vs. 17.0 ± 3.5 mmHg; P = 0.03). The mean AUC≥10 mmHg was also significantly smaller in the SPACE group. Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated agreement between IAP and ILP within a range of ± 1.0 mmHg.ConclusionsSPACE could be used to control and safely monitor IAP during gastric EFTR by measuring ILP during perforation of the gastric wall.
