The field of the invention is monitoring urine output and managing a patient's fluid levels using a diuretic.
The body of a healthy person naturally maintains a healthy balance of fluids. Patients often do not naturally achieve fluid balance when suffering from acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), acute kidney injury (AKI) and other similar conditions. The kidneys in these patients are unable to generate sufficient urine to avoid fluid overload and maintain a proper fluid balance. A fluid overloaded patient is treated to reduce the fluid volume in the body, such as by receiving diuretics which promote urine output. Generally, fluid volume should be reduced in a rapid, safe and effective manner to reduce fluid levels (decongestion) in the patient.
Liquids normally represent about half to three-quarters of the body weight of a health person. Approximately two-thirds of the total liquid in a body are in the cells of the body (intracellular). The remaining one-third of total liquids are outside of the cells (extracellular). Most of the extracellular liquid bathes the cells (interstitial liquid). Another portion of extracellular liquid is in blood and circulates through the vascular system. The portion of total body liquid in the blood is typically about 7% of total body liquids. Wikipedia, Extracellular Fluid (Aug. 17, 2018). The body removes excess liquid primarily by generating urine. Secondary modes for removing liquids are by evaporation through skin such as sweating, discharge in feces, and evaporation from the lungs.
Artificially promoting urine production by administration of a diuretic is a well-known and standard practice for reducing fluid levels in a patient. The choice of type, amount and timing of diuretics affect the amount of urine that is produced and thus the rate at which fluid is removed from the body. Diuretics may be introduced by an intravenous (IV) line. If treatments with diuretics are unsuccessful, ultra-filtration may be used to reduce fluid levels to, for example, treat ADFH.
The short-term effects of diuretic administration on urine production for an individual are not entirely predictable. In response to a dose of a diuretic, a patient may produce much less urine than expected which may prolong a hospital stay or cause an outpatient to be hospitalized. Another patient may response to a dose of diuretic by producing excessive amounts of urine which raises concerns hypotension and vital organ damage.
The potential for substantially different responses and treatment outcomes in response to a dosage of diuretics creates uncertainties for physicians who have to determine correct diuretic dosing for an individual patient based on the patient's clinical signs and symptoms. Physicians may prescribe a conservative (low) diuretic dosage and later slowly increase the dose to achieve a desired urine output. This conservative approach can prolong the treatment and may render the patient unable to produce sufficient amounts of urine. Disadvantages of the conservative approach are that the patient's symptoms may be prolonged and the underlying clinical state may worsen due to the slow application of diuretics.
There is a long felt need to provide physicians with diagnostic information and recommended treatments for patients in a fluid overload condition and being treated to reduce the fluid volume in their body.
The inventors conceived of and disclose herein a novel method of treatment to reduce fluid levels in a fluid overloaded patient, such as one suffering from ADHF, AKI or other condition that results in fluid overload. The method including a regimen that: (i) determines whether the patient is suited for diuretic therapy, (ii) rapidly reduces the intravascular volume of fluid in the patient to a range below a threshold low level of intravascular volume and a hemodynamic level below which there is a risk of vital organ damage due to low intravascular volume, and (iii) maintains the intravascular volume in the range to allow extravascular fluid in the body to move into the vasculature and be removed by the kidneys generating urine.
The inventors invented a method to treat patients suffering from fluid overload including: administrating a diuretic to the patient to increase urine output of the patient; monitoring intravascular volume of the patient; and maintaining the patient in a condition in which the intravascular volume is below a baseline intravascular volume and above a hemodynamic level by adjusting the administered diuretic.
A physician prescribes diuretics that are administered to the patient to promote urine output. The physician selects the diuretic, dosage and timing of the administration of the dosage to achieve urine output that rapidly reduces intravascular volume and subsequently maintains intravascular volume in the range.
A fluid management device, such as the RenalGuard® system may be used to monitor urine output and promote urine output by injecting a hydration fluid into the patient and monitoring urine output. The injection of the fluid is controlled by monitoring urine output and using urine output as feedback to control the amount of fluid added to the patient. The fluid management device controls the amount of fluid added to the patient such that there is a net reduction in the amount of fluid in the patient. The fluid management device may also detect if the patient is not producing sufficient amounts of urine in response to diuretics and then automatically stops fluid injection and issues an alert suggesting that other treatments, such as ultrafiltration, may be appropriate.
The information provided by the urine monitoring device may be used to determine if a fluid overloaded patient should be treated with diuretics to promote urine output, whether administered diuretics are causing the kidneys to generate urine, whether a dosage of diuretics should be adjusted, whether a fluid should be infused into the patient to promote kidney functioning or otherwise assist the patient, and whether the patient is becoming hypotensive or otherwise suffer problems associated with unnaturally low intravascular fluid levels.
The invention may also be embodied as a method to reduce liquid levels of a patient comprising: determining a maximum liquid loss limit for the patient; monitoring urine output by the patient; infusing a hydration liquid into the patient; determining a net rate of liquid removal from the patient based on a difference between the urine output and the infusion of the hydration liquid, and automatically adjusting the infusion of the hydration liquid to maintain the net rate of liquid removal below the maximum liquid loss limit.
The maximum liquid loss limit may be a maximum net rate of liquid lost by the patient. The infusion of the hydration liquid and the automatic adjusting of the infusion of the hydration liquid may be performed using a hydration liquid system including an infusion controller configured to control a pump configured to pump the hydration liquid into the patient.
The infusion of the hydration liquid into the patient may initially be at a high rate which is greater than the urine output, and the high rate is late reduced to below the urine output. The high rate of hydration fluid may be reduced in response to the urine output exceeding a predetermined high threshold rate.
The infusion of the hydration liquid at the high rate may be performed by automatically infusing the hydration liquid at a high rate greater than a concurrent rate of urine output while the concurrent rate of urine output is below a threshold urine rate, and automatically reducing the high rate of the hydration liquid to below the concurrent rate of urine output in response to the concurrent rate of the urine output exceeding the threshold urine rate.
The invention may also be embodied as a method to reduce liquid levels of a patient comprising: repeatedly determining a current urine rate by the patient; initially infusing a hydration liquid into the patient at a high hydration rate greater than the current urine rate; and reducing rate of infusion of the hydration liquid to a rate below the current urine rate in response to the current urine rate exceeding a predetermined high threshold rate.
The determination of the current urine rate may be performed at intervals of no greater than five minutes.
The method may include administering a diuretic to the patient while infusing the hydration liquid at the high hydration rate.
The method may further include: determining a net rate of liquid removal from the patient based on a difference between the urine output rate and a rate of the infusion of the hydration liquid, and automatically adjusting the infusion of the hydration liquid to maintain the net rate of liquid removal below a maximum liquid loss limit.
The following figures illustrate the invention and is use:
The optional hydration fluid infusion system 14 includes an infusion controller 16, that includes an infusion pump 18, e.g., a peristaltic pump, connected to a fluid source 20, e.g., saline bag, of an hydration fluid 22, e.g. saline, by tubing (line) 24. An intravenous (I.V.) needle 26 is inserted in a vein of the patient P and is connected to infusion pump 18 via tubing 24. Fluid 22 from the source 20 flows through the tubing 24 and I.V. needle 26 directly into a blood vessel, e.g., peripheral vein, of the patient P. The amount or rate of fluid(s) 22 flowing into the patient may be determined by the pumping rate or number of rotations the infusion pump 18.
The urine collection system 12 includes a catheter 28, such as a Foley catheter, placed in the bladder of patient P. Tubing 30 connects catheter 28 to a urine collection device, such as a bag 32. The urine 34 collected in the bag 32 is weighed or otherwise measured by a weight scale 36 or other urine flow measurement device which communicates with the infusion controller 16. A weight scale 38 may also weight the hydration fluid 22.
The amount or rate of urine 34 is monitored in real time by the infusion controller 16. Similarly, the amount of hydration fluid 22 in the fluid source 20 may be monitored or measured by a weight scale 38. The weight scales 36, 38 may be a single weight scale which measures the combined change in urine output and fluid input by and to the patient. The combined change in urine output and fluid input indicates the net fluid loss or gain by the patient.
The infusion controller 16 monitors the weight of the hydration fluid 22, the amount of the hydration fluid 22 pumped through pump 18 or otherwise monitors, in real time, the amount or rate of hydration fluid 22 flowing into the patient P.
The fluid management system 10 may be the RenalGuard System®, developed and marketed by RenalGuard Solutions, Inc. of Milford, Massachusetts, which in the past has been used to protect patients from kidney injury during procedures that require iodinated contrast agents.
A computer control system 40 in the infusion controller 16 receives an input as to a desired negative fluid balance, and/or amount(s) or rate(s) of urine output and/or of a desired amount(s) or rate(s) of a difference urine output and the amount of hydration fluid. A negative fluid balance refers to injecting less hydration fluid 22, in terms of mass or flow rate, into the patient than the amount of urine 34 output. The fluid balance may be repeatedly determined, such as every thirty minutes, every hour or every few hours. During the treatment period, the amount of hydration fluid injected into the patient may initially be greater than the amount of urine output, in an effort to start a high urine output flow. Later in the treatment period, such as after the urine output flow reaches a predetermined high threshold rate, the rate of infusion of the hydration fluid may be reduced. The high urine output flow is expected to continue after the reduction of the rate of the hydration fluid.
The computer control system 40 may include a processor(s) and a non-transient memory configured to store program instructions, settings for the patient fluid management system 10 and data collected from or calculated by the computer control system 40. The data may include urine output volume or rate of urine output, amount of fluid infused into the patient and rate of infusion, the amount and rate of injection of a diuretic, the weight of the patient at various times during the infusion of the fluid, and the time during which the patient is treated with the patient fluid management system 10. The computer control system 40 may include a console 42 having a user input device 44, such as a key pad, and a user output device 46, such as a computer display.
The input device 44 may be used to input certain parameters of the treatment sessions, such as a desired fluid balance level, desired urine output level, and the planned duration of the input balance level or urine output level. Another input may be the amount of fluids during the treatment session received by the patient through means other than the fluid source 20. For example, the input device 44 may be configured to receive inputs indicating the amount of fluid included with a saline filled bag 15 used to inject the diuretic into the patient.
Intravascular volume is used in
A patient in a fluid overloaded condition as indicated by an excessive intravascular fluid level 54 is a candidate for the regimen shown in
If the patient is responsive to a diuretic to promote urine output, a dose of a diuretic is applied to cause a high urine output during an initial phase 58 of the regimen. During the initial phase, urine output is increased to cause the intravascular volume 48 to fall below the normal base line 60 for intravascular volume and to a target minimum level 62 for intravascular volume.
The current level of intravascular volume is determined based measurements of blood pressure, cardiac output and/or systemic vascular resistance. The measurements may be performed by a system 46 configured to measure one or more of blood pressure, cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance. These measurements may be performed continuously or at regular intervals, such as every 10 minutes, 30 minutes or hourly. An example of a monitoring system to sense parameters indicative of intravascular volume and/or changes in intravascular volume is an intrathoracic impedance monitoring (such as may be included in an implanted defibrillator or biventricular pacing device).
During the initial phase, the rate of net fluid volume removal may be controlled by the fluid management system to be at a fluid loss limit (FLL) rate or at a rate offset by a selected safeguard for the FLL. The FLL is a maximum rate of net volume removal the fluid management system will target. The FLL may be defined clinically as a rate which the physician determines as rate of net amount of fluid volume removal from the patient without adverse hemodynamic changes or activation of central SNS or renal salt and water retaining mechanisms.
The fluid management system may automatically infuse the hydration fluid to ensure that the FLL is not exceeded. For example, if the kidneys are producing urine at a rate of 500 ml/hour and the FLL is set to a rate of 200 ml/hour, the system will infuse replacement fluid at a rate of 300 ml/hour. If urine production is below the FLL rate, the fluid management system may not infuse a hydration fluid or may infuse the hydration fluid at a rate intended to ensure that renal perfusion pressure is sufficient to promote generation of urine by the kidneys.
The base line is the amount of intravascular volume (blood plasma) that the patient would have when healthy and properly functioning kidneys.
The target minimum intravascular level 62 is defined clinically as the minimum level of intravascular volume that can maintain sufficient cardiac output to allow adequate renal perfusion. Alternatively, the target minimum intravascular level 62 may be defined physiologically as a 10% decrease in cardiac output as compared to the cardiac output at the base line 60 and/or a 10% increase in systemic vascular resistance from that at the baseline (60).
The rapid reduction in intravascular volume is intended to stop at time 62 which is when the intravascular volume reaches the target minimum intravascular level. The reduction in intravascular volume may be achieved by reduction in the type or dosage of the diuretic and/or by increasing the infusion rate of a hydration fluid 22. The infusion controller 16 may monitor in real time or by receiving user inputs an indicator(s) of intravascular volume and automatically increase (or start) the infusion rate of the hydration fluid. Similarly, the physician may manually increase the rate of the infusion fluid and adjust the type and/or dosage of the diuretic to slow or halt the reduction in intravascular fluid.
As shown in
During the initial phase, it is believed that the liquid in the vascular system is reduced as the kidneys produce urine. Other liquids in the body (interstitial and intracellular liquids) are slow to move into the vasculature. During at least an early portion of the initial phase, the interstitial and intracellular liquids are not flowing rapidly into the vasculature and thus the amount of liquid in the vascular volume drops rapidly as the urine rate is increased due to the diuretic. Moreover, the flow of interstitial and intracellular fluids into the vascular volume may remain at or below a maximum urine rate that can be achieved with aggressive dosages of a diuretic. Thus, during the optimization phase 68, the dosage of the diuretic and the infusion of the hydration fluid may be controlled to cause a urine rate that is commiserate, e.g., approximately equal too, the predicted rate at which interstitial and intracellular fluids enter the vascular volume.
During an optimization phase 68, the current intravascular volume level 70 moves above and below the target level 62. During this phase, the patient remains under treatment by a diuretic. Also, the fluid management system adjusts the infusion of the hydration fluid to achieve desired levels of urine output and negative fluid balance in the patient. During the optimization phase 68, the PRR is expected to be the high end at or slightly above a predefined range, such as 100 to 300 ml/hour.
During the optimization phase, the physician prescribes a diuretic and dosage which is intended to maintain the current intravascular volume level 70 at the target minimum intravascular volume 62. If the current intravascular volume level 70 is consistently below the target 62, the patient may be in an over-diuresis condition due to excessive urine output as compared to the rate at which interstitial and intracellular fluids move into the vascular volume to replace liquid (blood plasma) removed from the vascular volume due to urine. A patient that is in an over-diuresis condition may be a candidate to have a lower dosage of the diuretic or another less aggressive diuretic.
If the current intravascular volume level 70 is consistently above the target, the patient may be in an under-diuresis condition in which the urine output is insufficient to maintain the target 62 vascular volume. A patient that is in an under diuresis condition may be a candidate to receive a higher dosage of diuretic or a more aggressive diuretic.
Adjusting the diuretic type/dosage and/or the infusion of a hydration fluid is used to keep the intravascular volume 48 above a level 66 of an at-risk intravascular volume level. The at-risk intravascular volume level is a minimum volume below which the patient is at risk for vital organ damage, and/or the systolic arterial blood pressure is less than 90 mmHg and/or a mean arterial blood pressure is less than 60 mmHg. The intention is to maintain the intravascular fluid level always above the level 66 at which there is a risk of hypotension and/or hypoperfusion. In a fluid overload patient, there are excessive body liquids (interstitial and intracellular) beyond the liquids in the intravascular volume. These excess liquids should be removed to treat the fluid overload condition.
The regimen proposed in
The fluid management system 14 monitors the net removal of fluids from the body, such as by measuring the urine output and the hydration liquid input (and possibly inputs from other liquids). The fluid management system may produce alerts or reports that the patient is in an under-diuresis or over-diuresis condition. The physician, with the assistance of the fluid management system, may modify the diuretic or its dosage to treat the under-diuresis or will continue the regimen until a desired fluid balance is achieved in the patient.
The fluid management system 14 may also automatically adjust the pumping rate of the hydration fluid or generate a report of suggested pumping rates. The fluid management system 14 may automatically increase the pumping rate of the hydration fluid in response to a determination that the current intravascular volume 70 is below the target minimum 62. The amount of increase in the rate of the hydration fluid may be proportional to the difference between the current intravascular volume 70 and the target minimum 62 or proportional to a difference between the current intravascular volume 70 and the at-risk intravascular volume level 66.
The optimization phase 68 continues until the patient has been decongested such that the total body fluid is within a desired range.
Although specific features of the invention are shown in some drawings and not in others, this is for convenience only as each feature may be combined with any or all of the other features in accordance with the invention. For example, there are other ways to determine a patient's urine output and other ways to quantify the amount of hydration fluid administered to the patient. There are also other ways to redundantly check the amount of hydration fluid administered the patient. Also, the words “including”, “comprising”, “having”, and “with” as used herein are to be interpreted broadly and comprehensively and are not limited to any physical interconnection. Moreover, any embodiments disclosed in the subject application are not to be taken as the only possible embodiments. Other embodiments will occur to those skilled in the art and are within the following claims.
This application claims priority to U.S. provisional application 62/720,009, Filed Aug. 20, 2019, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3954010 | Hilblom | May 1976 | A |
4132644 | Kolberg | Jan 1979 | A |
4146029 | Ellinwood, Jr. | Mar 1979 | A |
4204957 | Weickhardt | May 1980 | A |
4216462 | McGrath et al. | Aug 1980 | A |
4229299 | Savitz et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4261360 | Perez | Apr 1981 | A |
4275726 | Schael | Jun 1981 | A |
4291692 | Bowman et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
4343316 | Jespersen | Aug 1982 | A |
4411649 | Kamen | Oct 1983 | A |
4448207 | Parrish | May 1984 | A |
4449538 | Corbitt et al. | May 1984 | A |
4504263 | Steuer et al. | Mar 1985 | A |
4658834 | Blankenship et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
4712567 | Gille et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4728333 | Masse et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4728433 | Buck et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4813925 | Anderson, Jr. et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4923598 | Schal | May 1990 | A |
4994026 | Fecondini | Feb 1991 | A |
5098379 | Conway et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5176148 | Wiest et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5179862 | Lynnworth | Jan 1993 | A |
5207642 | Orkin et al. | May 1993 | A |
5573506 | Vasko | Nov 1996 | A |
5586973 | Lemaire et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5709670 | Vancaillie et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5722947 | Jeppsson et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5769087 | Westphal et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5814009 | Wheatman | Sep 1998 | A |
5891051 | Han et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5910252 | Truitt et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5916153 | Rhea, Jr. | Jun 1999 | A |
5916195 | Eshel et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5981051 | Motegi et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5984893 | Ward | Nov 1999 | A |
6010454 | Arieff et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6171253 | Bullister et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6231551 | Barbut | May 2001 | B1 |
6272930 | Crozafon | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6514226 | Levin et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6531551 | Ohno et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6537244 | Paukovits et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6554791 | Cartledge et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6640649 | Paz et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6740072 | Starkweather et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6752779 | Paukovits et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6796960 | Cioanta et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6827702 | Lebel et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6942637 | Cartledge et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7029456 | Ware et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7044002 | Ericson et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7086615 | Joseph | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7137964 | Flaherty | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7278983 | Ireland et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7727222 | Da Silva | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7736354 | Gelfand et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7739921 | Babcock | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7758562 | Gelfand | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7758563 | Gelfand | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7837667 | Gelfand | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7938817 | Gelfand | May 2011 | B2 |
8007460 | Gelfand | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8075513 | Rudko et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8233957 | Merz et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8444623 | Gelfand | May 2013 | B2 |
8556846 | O'Mahony et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8714030 | Liu | May 2014 | B1 |
9526833 | Gelfand | Dec 2016 | B2 |
10045734 | Da Silva | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10537281 | Thompson et al. | Jan 2020 | B2 |
10639419 | Halpert | May 2020 | B2 |
11064939 | Da Silva | Jul 2021 | B2 |
11213621 | Halpert | Jan 2022 | B2 |
11357446 | Levin et al. | Jun 2022 | B2 |
11633137 | Conley et al. | Apr 2023 | B2 |
11696985 | Halpert | Jul 2023 | B2 |
11950925 | Levin | Apr 2024 | B2 |
11986302 | Conley et al. | May 2024 | B2 |
11992332 | Da Silva | May 2024 | B2 |
20010029340 | Mault et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020025597 | Matsuda | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020072647 | Schock et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020107536 | Hussein | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020151834 | Utterberg | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020161314 | Sarajarvi | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030040700 | Hickle | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030048185 | Citrenbaum et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030048432 | Jeng et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030114786 | Hiller et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20040025597 | Ericson et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040059295 | Cartledge et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040081585 | Reid | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040087894 | Flaherty | May 2004 | A1 |
20040122353 | Shahmirian et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040133187 | Hickle | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040163655 | Gelfand et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040167415 | Gelfand | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040167464 | Ireland et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040176703 | Christensen et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040193328 | Zaitsu et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040243075 | Harvie | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050027254 | Vasko | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050065464 | Talbot et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050085760 | Ware et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060052764 | Gelfand et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060064053 | Bollish et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060100743 | Townsend et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060184084 | Ware et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060235353 | Gelfand et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060253064 | Gelfand | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060270971 | Gelfand et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070055198 | O'Mahony | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070088333 | Levin et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20080027409 | Rudko et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080033394 | Gelfand et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080051764 | Dent et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080171966 | Rudko et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080221512 | DaSilva et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090054745 | Jennewine | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090062730 | Woo | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20100133510 | Kim et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100280443 | Gelfand et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100280444 | Gelfand et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100286559 | Paz et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110046514 | Greenwald et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110046516 | Paz et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110120231 | Berger | May 2011 | A1 |
20110196304 | Kramer et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110288524 | Gelfand et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120259308 | Gelfand | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130104667 | Koyano | May 2013 | A1 |
20130235691 | Volker | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130261412 | Reed, II | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130274705 | Burnes et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140031787 | Burnes et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140073973 | Sexton | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140228755 | Darrah et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140260600 | Rike | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140366641 | Jedema et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150105694 | Mahajan | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150233749 | Wang et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150258277 | Halpert | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160051176 | Ramos et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160051750 | Tsoukalis | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160136356 | Ribble et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20170016755 | Boussange et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170052056 | Yamasaki et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170290974 | Tsoukalis | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20180085510 | Halpert et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180110455 | Chang et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180177945 | Sims et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180245967 | Parker et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20190001057 | Tsoukalis | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190038833 | Pirazzoli et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190262532 | Oh et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190321588 | Burnett | Oct 2019 | A1 |
20200230351 | Kelly et al. | Jul 2020 | A1 |
20200324044 | Gylland et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
20200360604 | Kolko et al. | Nov 2020 | A1 |
20200284234 | Niland | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20200405955 | Shah et al. | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210077007 | Jouret et al. | Mar 2021 | A1 |
20210085853 | Chen et al. | Mar 2021 | A1 |
20210169408 | Levin | Jun 2021 | A1 |
20210196880 | O'Mahony et al. | Jul 2021 | A1 |
20210236727 | Levin et al. | Aug 2021 | A1 |
20210260306 | Gravenstein et al. | Aug 2021 | A1 |
20210283357 | Leonard | Sep 2021 | A1 |
20210298653 | Woodward et al. | Sep 2021 | A1 |
20220152302 | Halpert | May 2022 | A1 |
20220288362 | Porter et al. | Sep 2022 | A1 |
20220296406 | Keelen | Sep 2022 | A1 |
20220313158 | Levin et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20220330866 | Conley et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20220330867 | Conley et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20220339622 | Conley et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20230010793 | Testani | Jan 2023 | A1 |
20230414871 | Halpert | Dec 2023 | A1 |
20240260874 | Halpert | Feb 2024 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1986007 | Oct 2008 | EP |
3278833 | Feb 2018 | EP |
4108171 | Dec 2022 | EP |
2560580 | Sep 2018 | GB |
2008110150 | May 2008 | JP |
2011-520549 | Jul 2011 | JP |
2017-536857 | Feb 2017 | JP |
10-2022-0035738 | Mar 2022 | KR |
WO-1996016685 | Jun 1996 | WO |
WO-1996028209 | Sep 1996 | WO |
WO-1997016220 | May 1997 | WO |
WO-1999006087 | Feb 1999 | WO |
2005102441 | Nov 2005 | WO |
WO-2006041496 | Apr 2006 | WO |
WO-2009029899 | Mar 2009 | WO |
WO-2013154783 | Oct 2013 | WO |
2014022422 | Feb 2014 | WO |
WO-2015142617 | Sep 2015 | WO |
2016103256 | Jun 2016 | WO |
WO-2018044959 | Mar 2018 | WO |
2018114794 | Jun 2018 | WO |
WO-2019222485 | Nov 2019 | WO |
WO-2020033752 | Feb 2020 | WO |
WO-2022219578 | Oct 2022 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Eiko Furutani et al., “An Automatic Control System of the Blood Pressure of Patients Under Surgical Operation”, International Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems, vol. 2, No. 1, Mar. 2004, pp. 39-54. |
Delos Cosgrove III et al., “Automated Control of Postoperative Hypertension: A Prospective, Randomized Multicenter Study”, 1989 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, 6 pages. |
Samira Bell et al., “Risk of Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Orthopaedic Surgery—Development and Validation of Risk Score adn Effect of Acute Kidney Injury on Survival: Observational Cohort Study”, BMJ: 2015:351:h56391 doi: 10.1136/bmj.h5639, 9 pages. |
C.S.C. Bouman et al., “Red Blood Cell Transfusion and Furosemide in Cardiac Surgery: Friend or Foe?”, The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, Dec. 2012, vol. 70, No. 10, 3 pages. |
O. Goren et al., “Perioperative Acute Kidney Injury”, British Journal of Anaesthesia, 115(S2): ii3-ii14 (2015), 12 pages. |
Sean Josephs et al., “Perioperative Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Treatment of Acute Kidney Injury”, International Anesthesiology Clinics, vol. 47, No. 4, www.anesthesiaclinics.com, pp. 89-105. |
Philippe Kolh, “Renal Insufficiency After Cardiac Surgery: A Challenging Clinical Problem”, European Heart Journal (2009) 30, pp. 1824-1827. |
Andrea Lassnigg et al., “Lack of Renoprotective Effects of Dopamine and Furosemide During Cardiac Surgery”, J Am Soc Nephrol 11: pp. 97-104, 2000. |
Colin Lenihan et al., “Trends In Acute Kidney Injury, Associated Use of Dialysis, and Mortality After Cardiac Surgery, 1999 to 2008”, Ann Thorac Surg. Jan. 2013; 95(1): 20-28, doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.05.131, 17 pages. |
Melanie Meersch et al., “Perioperative Acute Kidney Injury: An Under-Recognized Problem”, Oct. 2017, vol. 125, No. 4, www.anesthesia-analgesia.org, pp. 1223-1232. |
Roderica Rui Ge Ng et al., “Identification of Modifiable Risk Factors for Acute Kidney Injury After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in an Asian Population”, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Apr. 2014, pp. 1356-1361. |
Juan Jose Olivero et al., “Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiovascular Surgery: An Overview”, MDCVJ, VIII (3) 2012, debakeyheartcenter.com/journal, pp. 31-36. |
Charuhas Thakar, “Perioperative Acute Kidney Injury”, Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease, vol. 20, No. 1 (January), 2013: pp. 67-75. |
S. Vellinga et al., “Identfication of Modifiable Risk Factors for Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Surgery”, The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, Dec. 2012, vol. 70, No. 10, pp. 450-454. |
Mihai Gheorghiade et al., “Current Medical Therapy for Advanced Heart Failure”, American Heart Journal, Jun. 1998, pp. S231-S248. |
Kirkwood Adams et al., Executive Summary: HFSA 2006 Comprehensive Heart Failure Practice Guideline, Journal of Cardiac Failure, vol. 12, No. 1, 2006, pp. 10-38. |
“2016 ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure—Web Addenda”, European Heart Journal, doi:10.1039/eurheartj/ehw128, 17 pages. |
Teixeira et al., “Fluid Balance and Urine vol. are Independent Predictors of Mortality in Acute Kidney Injury”, Critical Care 17:R14 (2013) 11 pages. |
Kui Jin et al., “Intensive Monitoring of Urine Output Is Associated With Increased Detection of Acute Kidney Injury and Improved Outcomes,” Chest Journal—Original Research Critical Care, 152#5, pp. 972-979 (Nov. 2017) 8 pages. |
Abraham Otero, “A New Device to Automate the Monitoring of Critical Patients' Urine Output”, Hindawi Publishing Corp, BioMed Research Int'l, vol. 2014, Article ID 587593, 8 pages. |
Adaptec Medical Devices, “Ongoing Access to Real-Time and Accurate Monitoring of Urine Output Could Improve Management of Critically Ill Patients,” Clinical Literature Review, (2016) 8 pages. |
Mayo Clinic, “Creatinine Test”, Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research (MFMER) (downloaded Aug. 16, 2018). |
Stickler et al., “A Sensor to Detect the Early Stages in the Development of Crystalline Proteus mirabilis Biofilm on Indwelling Bladder Catheters”, Journal of Clinical Microbiology, Apr. 2006, p. 1540-1542. |
Antonio Tricoli, “Miniaturized Bio-and Chemical-Sensors for Point-of-Care Monitoring of Chronic Kidney Diseases,” Sensors 2018, 18, 942; (Mar. 22, 2018) 18 pages. |
Kambiz Kalantari, “Assessment of Intravascular Volume Status and Volume Responsiveness in Critically Ill Patients,” Kidney International (2013) 83, 1017-1028 (Jan. 9, 2013) 12 pages. |
David Farcy, “Review: Pitfalls in Using Central Venous Pressure as a Marker of Fluid Responsiveness,” Emergency Medicine. Jan. 2016;48(1):18-28, 15 pages. |
Barbara Lara, “Accurate Monitoring of Intravascular Fluid Volume: A Novel Application of Intrathoracic Impedance Measures for the Guidance of Volume Reduction Therapy,” IJC Heart & Vasculature, 8 (2015) pp. 47-51, 5 pages. |
Vivane Conradds, “Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value of Implantable Intrathoracic Impedance Monitoring as a Predictor of Heart Failure Hospitalizations: The SENSE-HF Trial,” European Heart Journal (2011) 32, 2266-2273, 8 pages. |
Sheldon Magder et al., “The Clinical Role of Central Venous Pressure Measurements”, Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 22(1); 207, 8 pages. |
Se Won Oh et al., “Loop Diuretics in Clinical Practice”, Electrolytes & Blood Pressure, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4520883, printed Mar. 25, 2019, 6 pages. |
Alison Shepherd, “Measuring and Managing Fluid Balance”, Nursing Times, vol. 107, No. 28, pp. 12-16 (Jul. 19, 2011) 5 pages. |
Phillips et al., “Measurement of sodium ion concentration in undiluted urine with cation-selective polymeric membrane electrodes after the removal of interfering compounds”, Talanta, Elsevier, Amsterdam, NL, vol. 74, No. 2, Nov. 15, 2007, pp. 255-264. |
U.S. Appl. No. 18/434,540, filed Feb. 6, 2024, Halpert. |
U.S. Appl. No. 18/595,182, filed Mar. 4, 2024, Levin. |
U.S. Appl. No. 18/637,340, filed Apr. 16, 2024, Conley et al.. |
U.S. Appl. No. 18/641,241, filed Apr. 19, 2024, Da Silva. |
Allen et al., “Continuous Versus Bolus Dosing of Furosemide for Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure,” American Journal of Cardiology, 105(12):1794-1794, 2010. |
Baliga, “Diuretic Therapy for Heart Failure Patients,” American College of Cardiology, 75:1178-1195, 2020. |
Brater, “Diuretic Therapy,” New England Journal of Medicine, 339:387-395, 1998. |
Ellison et al., “Diuretic Treatment in Heart Failure,” New England Journal of Medicine, 377:1964-1975, 2017. |
Hasselblad et al., “Relation Between Dose of Loop Diuretics and Outcomes in a Heart Failure Population: Results of the ESCAPE Trial”, European Journal of Heart Failure, 9(10):1064-1069, 2007. |
Marenzi et al., “Prevention of Contrast Nephropathy by Furosemide With Matched Hydration,” JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 5(1):90-97, 2011. |
Mendeley et al., “Furosemide”, Science Direct, 5 p. 2016. |
Oh et al., “Loop Diuretics in Clinical Practice,” Review: Electrolyte Blood Press, 13(1): 5 pages, 2015. |
Palazzuli et al. “Continuous versus bolus intermittent loop diuretic infusion in acutely decompensated heart failure: a prospective randomized trial,” Critical Care 18, 2014. |
Prandota et al., “Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of furosemide in man,” European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmcokinetics, 1(4): 5 pages, 1976. |
Rosenberg et al., “Combination Therapy with Metolazone and Loop Diuretics in Outpatients with Refactory Heart Failure: An Observational Study and Review of the Literature,” Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy, Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 19, No. 4, Aug. 2005, 6 pages. |
Testani et al., “Rapid and Highly Accurate Prediction of Poor Loop Diuretic Natriuretic Response in Patients with Heart Failure,” Circulation; Heart Failure, vol. 9. No. 1, 2016, 32 pages. |
Unknown Author, “Furosemide Drug Summary,” Prescriber's Digital Reference, pp. 1-31, 2016. |
Yeh et al., “Goal-directed diuresis: A case—control study of continuous furosemide infusion in critically ill trauma patients”, The Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock, 8(1): 34-38, 2015. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2005/008948 dated Oct. 3, 2006, 3 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2007/021791 dated May 8, 2008, 7 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/U20S07/009685 dated Jul. 18, 2008, 10 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2007/009684 dated Jul. 21, 2008, 7 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/007845 dated Sep. 17, 2008, 5 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2008/007841 dated Sep. 18, 2008 4 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2007/009683 dated Nov. 24, 2008, 6 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2009/002739 dated Jun. 19, 2009, 4 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2010/000137 dated Mar. 16, 2010, 8 pages. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/020196, dated Jun. 12, 2015, 5 pages. |
Bart et al., “Ultrafiltration in Decompensated Heart Failure With Cardiorenal Syndrome”, The New England Journal of Medicine, Dec. 13, 2012, 9 pages, Massachusetts Medical Society. |
Brezis et al., Hypoxia of the Renal Medulla—Its Implications for Disease, New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 322, No. 10, Mar. 9, 1995, 9 pages. |
Briguori et al., “Renal Insufficiency After Contrast Media Administration Trial II (Remedial II): RenalGuard System in High-Risk Patients for Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury”, Circulation, Journal of the American Heart Association, Mar. 13, 2011, 10 pages. |
Dorval et al., “Feasibility Study of the RenalGuard™ Balanced Hydration System: A Novel Strategy for the Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy in High Risk Patients”, International Journal of Cardiology, 2011, 5 pages, Elsevier Ireland Ltd. |
Edelson et al., Pharmacokinetics of Iohexol, a New Nonionic Radiocontrast Agent, in Humans, Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, vol. 73, No. 7, Jul. 1984, 3 pages. |
Felker et al., “Diuretic Strategies in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure”, The New England Journal of Medicine, Mar. 3, 2011, vol. 364, No. 9, 9 pages. |
Gloor, James M. and Vincente E. Torres, Reflux and Obstructive Nephropathy, Atlas of Diseases of the Kidney, on-line edition, vol. Two, Section I, Ch. 8, pp. 8.1-8.25, 1999, 27 pages. |
Hvistendahl et al., Renal Hemodynamic Response to Gradated Ureter Obstruction in the Pig, Nephron 1996, 74:168-74, 7 pages. |
Lelarge et al., Acute Unilateral Renal Failure and Contralateral Ureteral Obstruction, American Journal of Kidney Diseases, vol. XX, No. 3, Sep. 1992, 3 pages. |
Levin et al. High-volume diuresis with matched maintenance of intravascular volume may prevent contrast-induced nephropathy in post-transplant patients with moderate-severe baseline renal impairment, Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine, Elsevier, NL, vol. 8, No. 2, Apr. 1, 2007, 1 page. |
Lloyd-Jones et al., “Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2009 Update. A Report From the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee”, Circulation, Journal of the American Heart Association, Jan. 27, 2009, 161 pages. |
Marenzi et al.. “Prevention of Contrast Nephropathy by Furosemide With matched Hydration. The MYTHOS (Induced Diuresis With Matched Hydration Compared to Standard Hydration for Contrast Induced Nephropathy Prevention) Trial”, JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 5, No. 1, 2012 The American College of Cardiology Foundation, 8 pages. |
Mawer et al., “Value of Forced Diuresis in Acute Barbiturate Poisoning”, Jun. 29, 1968, British Medical Journal, 2, 4 pages. |
Paterna et al., “Changes in Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels and Bioelectrical Impedance Measurements After Treatment With High-Dose Furosemide and Hypertonic Saline Solution Versus High-Dose Furosemide Alone in Refractory Congestive Heart Failure”, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2005, vol. 45, No. 12, 7 pages. |
Pederson et al., Renal Water and Sodium Handling During Gradated Unilateral Ureter Obstruction, Scand J. Urol Nephrol, 2002, 36:163-72, 11 pages. |
Rihal et al., Incidence and Prognostic Importance of Acute Renal Failure After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Circulation, May 14, 2002, 6 pages. |
Rosamilia et al., Electromotive Drug Administration of Lidocaine and Dexamethasone Followed by Cystodistension in Women with Interstitial Cystitis, International Urogyecologyl Journal, Pelvic Floor Dysfunction 1997; 8: 142-5, 4 pages. |
S215 Ultra Low Profile Single Point Load Cell—Strain Guage Sensors and Load Cells, Ultra-Low Profile Single Point Load Cell—S215, http://smdsensors.com/detail_pgs/s215.htm 2005, 3 pages. |
Solomon et al., Effects of Saline, Mannitol, and Furosemide on Acute Decreases in Renal Function Induced by Radiocontrast Agents, The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 331: 1416-1420, Nov. 24, 1994, No. 21, 5 pages. |
Stevens, Melissa A., Md et al., A Prospective Randomized Trial of Prevention Measures in Patients at High Risk for Contrast Nephropathy, Results of the P.R.I.N.C.E. Study, Journal of American College of Cardiology, vol. 33, No. 2, Feb. 1999, 9 pages. |
Stevenson et al., “Editorial Comment, Torrent or Torment From the Tubules?”, Challenge of the Cardiorenal Connections, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 45, No. 12, 2005, 4 pages. |
Wakelkamp et al., The influence of drug input rate on the development of tolerance to frusemide, Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol 1998, 46:479-487, 9 pages. |
Weinstein et al., Potential deleterious Effect of Furosmide in Radiocontrast Nephropathy, Department of Medicine, Hadassah Univeristy Hospital, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel, Nephron 1992, 62: 413-415, pages. |
Doty et al., Effect of Increased Renal Venous Pressure on Renal Function, The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection and Critical Care, vol. 47, No. 6, Dec. 1999, 4 pages. |
Heyman et al., Pathophysiology of Radiocontrast Nephropathy: A Role for Medullary Hypoxia, Investigative Radiology, vol. 34, No. 11, Nov. 1999, 7 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62720009 | Aug 2018 | US |