End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients typically have an increased extracellular volume (ECV) due to their impaired kidney function. Management of this fluid excess is one of the cornerstones in the treatment of these patients. In patients who undergo hemodialysis (HD), this excess extracellular fluid volume can be removed by ultrafiltration (UF). During UF, fluid is removed from the blood stream (intravascular compartment), and fluid from the tissue (interstitial compartment) shifts into the intravascular space (driven by hydrostatic and oncotic pressure gradients; details below) to counter the reduction in blood plasma volume. This process, called vascular refilling, is critical for maintenance of adequate intravascular filling and blood pressure during dialysis.
Whenever the vascular refill rate is less than the ultrafiltration rate, the plasma volume declines; this process manifests itself in a decline in absolute blood volume (ABV) and a decline in relative blood volume (RBV). This decline of RBV translates into increased hematocrit and blood protein levels. Measurements of hematocrit or blood protein concentration during HD form the basis of relative blood volume monitoring. RBV can be measured continuously and non-invasively throughout HD with commercially available devices, such as the Crit-Line Monitor (CLM) or the Blood Volume Monitor (BVM). While the CLM measures hematocrit, the BVM measures blood protein concentration.
The RBV dynamic is the result of plasma volume reduction by ultrafiltration, and vascular refilling by capillary and lymphatic flow.
Embodiments of the invention provide a system for analyzing refill processes in patients. Understanding these quantitative aspects is clinically important, since both the driving forces (e.g. hydrostatic pressures; details below) and the capillary tissue characteristics (e.g. hydraulic conductivity; details below), are intimately related to (patho) physiological aspects which are highly relevant in the care of HD patients, such as fluid overload and inflammation. Neither of these forces and tissue characteristics are accessible to direct measurements feasible during routine HD treatments.
The system utilizes mathematical models on qualitative and quantitative behavior of vascular refill during dialysis to estimate certain output parameters corresponding to the quantities that are indicative of the fluid dynamics within a patient. Based on these output parameters, the system is able to perform various treatment-related operations, such as indicating status of the parameters to a treating physician, providing notifications and alerts, adjusting current and/or future treatment processes, aggregating and storing patient-specific information to provide trend data and/or to modify future treatments based thereon, etc.
In a particular exemplary embodiment, the system utilizes a two-compartment model incorporating microvascular fluid shifts and lymph flow from the interstitial to the vascular compartment. Protein flux is described by a combination of both convection and diffusion.
In an exemplary embodiment, a Crit-Line device is used to identify and monitor certain input parameters of a patient, including for example, a Hematocrit (“Hct”) level.
The present invention will be described in even greater detail below based on the exemplary figures. The invention is not limited to the exemplary embodiments. All features described and/or illustrated herein can be used alone or combined in different combinations in embodiments of the invention. The features and advantages of various embodiments of the present invention will become apparent by reading the following detailed description with reference to the attached drawings which illustrate the following:
The server 120 uses the received information to calculate further information based upon models for vascular refill during dialysis (e.g., estimated values for Lp, Pc, Pi, σ, α, κ and trend data). This information may then be provided to the data warehouse 130 for storage and for future reference, and to the dialysis center 102 for indication to a treating physician or for performance of other treatment-related operations (e.g., providing notifications and alerts, and adjusting current and/or future treatment processes).
Although
Additionally, in the meantime, a sensing device collects data for hematocrit (Hct) and/or relative blood volume (RBV) at stage 209. This device can be, for instance a Crit-Line Monitor or one of its successors (e.g. CliC device) or any other machine that measures either Hct or RBV with sufficient accuracy and frequency (e.g., at least 1 measurement per minute). The more accurate the measurement is, the more parameters can be identified and estimated by the server 120. After a predefined time has passed (e.g., between 20 to 50 minutes), at stage 211, the collected Hct or RBV together with the ultrafiltration profile (including the UFR) that was run up to that point and the patient ID is sent to the server 120. The server then uses the data corresponding to the treatment of the patient, as well as patient data from the data warehouse 130 (if available), to perform model-based computations (discussed in more detail below with respect to
It will be appreciated that the patient ID may be used by the server 120 to merge the data from the clinic (the dialysis treatment center 102) with the patient information obtained from the data warehouse 130.
Using the determined starting point, the server 120 then utilizes a mathematical model for vascular refill (as will be discussed in further detail below) to estimate values for output parameters (or “hemodialysis-related treatment parameters”) Lp, Pc, Pi, σ, α, and/or κ (which are indicative of an effect of vascular refill on the patient caused by the hemodialysis). This includes performing a parameter identification on the desired time interval at stage 307, solving model equations using the initial parameter values at stage 309, plotting the model output with Hct data at stage 311, and determining whether the model fits the data at stage 313. If the model does not fit the data at stage 313, the initial values are modified at stage 315 and stages 307, 309, 311 and 313 are performed again. If the model does fit the data at stage 313, but checking the range of parameter values obtained to determine whether the values are within a (patho)physiological range at stage 317 reveals that the values are not within range the (patho)physiological range, the initial values are modified at stage 315 and stages 307, 309, 311 and 313 are performed again. If the model does fit the data at stage 313, and checking the range of parameter values obtained to determine whether the values are within a (patho)physiological range at stage 317 reveals that the values are within the (patho)physiological range, the server 120 provides one or more estimated output parameters as output so as to facilitate the performance of one or more treatment-related operations (as will be discussed below in further detail with respect to
The parameter identification at stage 307 involves an inverse problem being solved several times (as will be discussed in further detail below). Additionally, solving the model equations at stage 309 involves solving the inverse problem to compute parameter estimates for Lp, Pc, Pi, σ, α, and/or κ. Based on checking whether the model fits the data at stage 311, as well as checking whether the values are within a (patho)physiological range at stage 317, the computation process is repeated until reliable and meaningful parameter values are found.
Additionally, notifications and/or alerts may be generated at stage 407. For example, treating physicians and other personnel may be notified of the estimated output parameters based on the display of the values for the estimated output parameters on a screen of a computing device at a treatment facility. They may also be otherwise notified via various forms of messaging or alerts, such as text messaging, paging, internet messaging, etc. Specific alerts, for example, relating to potential problems arising from the hemodialysis treatment, may be generated based on certain output parameters meeting certain criteria (such as exceeding or falling below a predetermined range of values or threshold, or rising/falling at a rate determined to be potentially problematic). In an example, the values of certain output parameters are presented on a screen (e.g. the display of the Crit-Line Monitor) together with normal ranges. Further, trends of the parameter values for the patient (e.g., over the last 1-3 months) may also be depicted. Examples of graphical depictions on such a display are illustrated in
When there exists previous parameter estimates for Lp, Pc, Pi, σ, α, κ for the patient, the trend over a time period (e.g., the last 1-3 months) can be computed using linear regression. The new parameter values (together with the trend, if available) are passed on to be reported at the clinic. Moreover, the new estimates are communicated to the data warehouse and stored, such that the information about the indicators will be made accessible for additional analyses. These additional analyses include but are not limited to trend analysis over time, correlational analysis with other variables, such as interdialytic weight gain, target weight, and biomarkers, such as serum albumin levels, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein (CRP), and others.
Since the identified variables are indicative of (patho)physiological processes, but are not accessible to direct measurements, the estimated values will be considered for clinical decision making. For example, a high value for the filtration coefficient (Lp) is indicative of inflammation, which may require additional investigation to confirm the presence of inflammation. Trend data showing rising levels of Lp may further be indicative of smoldering or aggravating inflammation and may require additional investigation as well. Thus, certain notifications or alerts/alarms may be triggered based on the value for Lp exceeding a predetermined threshold or the rate of increase for Lp exceeding a predetermined threshold.
In another example, a low value for the systemic capillary reflection coefficient (σ) is indicative of capillary leakage, sepsis, or an allergic response and/or anaphylaxis, which may require additional investigation into the source of the leakage, sepsis, or allergic response. Trend data showing falling levels of (σ) is indicative of smoldering or aggravating capillary leakage. Thus, certain notifications or alerts/alarms may be triggered based on the value for a being below a predetermined threshold or the rate of decrease for a falling below a predetermined threshold.
In another example, a high value of (or increasing trend for) hydrostatic capillary pressure (Pc) is indicative of autonomic dysfunction, high venous pressure, drugs, or arterial hypertension, which may require evaluation of a patient's drug prescription and/or a cardiac exam to investigate the high venous pressure. On the other hand, a low value of Pc is indicative of an exhausted reserve to increase peripheral resistance, which may require measures to increase intravascular volume (e.g., lowering the UFR). Thus, certain notifications or alerts/alarms may be triggered based on the value for Pc being outside a predetermined range or the rate of increase for Pc exceeding a predetermined threshold. Treatment adjustments may also be made based on Pc falling below a predetermined threshold, such as automatically decreasing the UFR for a current or a future treatment of the patient. The UFR may also be manually decreased by a treating physician, for example, in response to reviewing the Pc information displayed at the treatment center, or in response to an automatic prompt triggered by the detection of the low Pc level that gives the physician the option of decreasing the rate of and/or stopping treatment.
In yet another example, a high value of (or increasing trend for) hydrostatic interstitial pressure (Pi) and/or constant lymph flow rate (κ) is indicative of interstitial fluid overload, while a low value (or decreasing trend for) hydrostatic interstitial pressure (Pi) and/or constant lymph flow rate (κ) is indicative of interstitial fluid depletion. The clinical response here may be to re-evaluate the fluid removal rate (i.e., increasing it in the event of fluid overload and decreasing it in the event of fluid depletion) for a current and/or future treatment. As discussed above with respect to Pc, notifications and/or alerts/alarms may be triggered based on the hydrostatic interstitial pressure (Pi) and/or constant lymph flow rate (κ) falling outside respective predetermined ranges, and automatic or manual treatment modifications may be made as well.
It will be appreciated that the predetermined thresholds or ranges used in the aforementioned comparisons may be based on previous patient data, such that a predetermined threshold for one patient may differ from the predetermined threshold for another patient. Thus, outlier values with respect to the estimated output parameters may be detected and responded to appropriately (e.g., with a notification or alert/alarm, or with adjustment of a current and/or future treatment).
As discussed above, significant changes of these variables between dialysis sessions, marked trends or out of range values may be highlighted by a device at the treatment center pursuant to stage 407. In one example, an alarm flag can be used to mark questionable parameters needing further investigation by clinic personnel (e.g., by alerting clinic personnel through visual and/or audio alarms triggered by the patient monitoring device). For instance, as discussed above, a positive Pi may indicate fluid overload and may be considered when target weight is prescribed. Another example is an increase of Lp, which may indicate an evolving inflammatory process. Such a signal may result in additional diagnostic interventions, such as measurement of CRP, clinical evaluation, blood cultures, or medical imaging.
Additionally, the output parameters discussed herein (Lp, Pc, Pi, σ, α, and/or κ) may further serve as independent variables in statistical models designed to predict patient outcomes of interest. For example, the server of
It will be appreciated that the referenced logistic regression models are only exemplary. Various different types of statistical models may be used, with categorical or continuous outcomes. Examples of models include Cox regression models, Poisson regression models, accelerated failure time models, generalized linear models, generalized additive models, classification trees, and random forests. Examples of outcomes of interest include death during a certain period of time, hospitalization (binary or count) over a certain period of time, systemic inflammation (as measured by biochemical markers, such as C-reactive protein and IL-6), and degree of fluid overload (as determined by bioimpedance or other methods).
Principles underlying the operation of the server depicted in
Modeling assumptions and formulation: The model of vascular refill presented herein is a two-compartment model. The blood plasma in the patient's body is lumped in one compartment and the interstitial fluid including the lymphatic system are lumped in another, namely, the plasma and interstitial compartments, respectively. The plasma and interstitium are separated by a capillary wall which is a semipermeable membrane regulating fluid exchange and protein flux. Fluid movement between plasma and interstitium is influenced by the properties of the capillary wall (reflection coefficient σ and filtration coefficient Lp), and pressure gradients across the membrane (oncotic and hydrostatic pressures). Furthermore, lymph flows at a constant rate and protein concentration from the interstitial into the plasma compartment. The model is formulated to describe the short-term dynamics of vascular refill for a period of about one hour. Hence, some of the model assumptions are only valid when considering a short time duration.
Assumptions:
(1) The plasma compartment (Vp) is connected to the interstitial compartment (V1) which includes the lymphatic system in the microvasculature. Vp is open at the dialyzer membrane where protein-free ultrafiltrate is removed during ultrafiltration.
(2) The ultra filtration rate (JUF) set at the dialysis machine determines the flow across the dialyzer.
(3) A constant lymph flow (κ) with constant protein concentration (α) goes from interstitium into plasma.
(4) Net flow between Vp and Vi is determined by the Starling pressures.
(5) Colloid osmotic pressure relationships are determined by protein concentrations.
(6) The hydrostatic pressure gradient is assumed to be constant.
(7) The hydrostatic capillary pressure (Pc) is constant.
(8) The net protein flux (Js) is the sum of both convective and diffusive fluxes across the capillary wall.
By Assumptions 1-3, the change in plasma volume at time t is governed by
where Jv(t) represents the amount of fluid crossing the capillary membrane at a certain time t, K is the lymph flow from interstitium to plasma, and JUF(t) is the ultrafiltration rate. The fluid movement across the membrane depends on the net imbalance between effective colloid osmotic and pressure gradients (Assumption 4). Following Starling's hypothesis, we have
Jv(t)=Lp(σ(πp(t)−πi(t))−(Pc(t)−Pi(t))). (2)
with Lp denoting the filtration coefficient (which is hydraulic conductivity×surface area), σ is the osmotic reflection coefficient, πp(t), πi(t) are the plasma and interstitial colloid osmotic pressures, respectively, and Pc(t), Pi(t) are the hydrostatic capillary and interstitial pressures, respectively, at a given time t. Plasma proteins leak into the interstitium and the degree of leakiness can be quantified by Staverman's osmotic reflection coefficient σ ranging from 0 to 1; where a value σ=1 means perfect reflection, and thus no leakage of the specified solute. A quadratic polynomial approximation is used to describe oncotic pressures, though other approximations are possible:
πp(t)=αp
πi(t)=αi
where cp(t), ci(t) are protein concentrations in plasma and interstitium, respectively, at a given time t. Further details can be found in Appendix A.
To describe capillary refill dynamics during short-pulse ultrafiltration, it is assumed that the pressure difference between Pc(t) and Pi(t) is constant (Assumption 6). Since Pc is well autoregulated over a wide range of blood pressures, it is further assumed that it remains constant for short duration, that is, Pc(t)≈Pc (Assumption 7). As a consequence of Assumptions 6 and 7, Pi(t) is constant during short-time duration, that is, Pi(t)≈Pi.
The net flux of proteins between plasma and interstitium is the sum of convective and diffusive fluxes across the capillary wall and protein backflow from the lymph (Assumption 8). Thus, we have
where PS is the permeability-surface area product, α is the concentration of protein backflow from the lymph, and x is the Peclet number describing the convective flux relative to the diffusive capacity of the membrane:
When Jv(t)≥0, protein flows into the plasma while when Jv(t)<0 protein goes into the interstitium. Equation (4) can be rewritten as
Note that Js(t) is a continuous function.
Since the plasma protein concentration can be expressed in terms of its mass and plasma volume as
and the change of protein mass in the plasma at time t is determined by the net protein flux as
the change in plasma protein concentration is obtained as
The change in interstitial volume is governed by the volume lost to plasma and the lymphatic system and thus,
By a similar argument, the mass of proteins that goes to the plasma compartment is the loss term in the interstitium compartment and thus the change of the interstitial protein mass is
and with interstitial protein concentration as
the change in interstitial protein concentration is given by
Model equations: The dynamics of the two-compartment model is described by the following system of ordinary differential equations
Model output: In order to estimate certain parameters, the model is compared to measurement data. The Crit-Line Monitor device is an exemplary device that provides readings of the hematocrit concentration and oxygen saturation during hemodialysis. It is a non-invasive method based on an optical sensor technique. The sensor is attached to a blood chamber and is placed in-line between the arterial blood tubing set and the dialyzer. The measurements are based on both the absorption properties of the hemoglobin molecule and the scattering properties of red blood cells. Hematocrit levels can be expressed in terms of the model state variables, namely, Vp, cp, Vi, and ci for parameter identification.
Let BV(t) and Vp(t) denote the blood volume and the plasma volume, respectively, at time t. Note that
Vp(t)−Vp(0)=BV(t)−BV(0). (13)
Expressing the blood volume in terms of plasma volume and the hematocrit in Eq. (13) and rearranging the terms yields
Therefore, Hct at time t can be expressed in terms of initial hematocrit, initial plasma volume and Vp at time t as follows
SIMULATIONS: First, some theoretical results are presented assigning values to the parameters found in the literature. Table 1 provides the list of parameters, its meaning, corresponding values and units used in the model.
For model simulation, the following initial conditions are considered:
The predialysis plasma colloid osmotic pressure of πp*=28 mmHg has been reported. This value is used to compute the initial cp and ci. The computed value for the protein concentration assuming equilibrium is α=24.612. Initial plasma volume is set at 4000 mL and the initial interstitial volume is calculated based on the volume relation mentioned above. The initial values for the state variables are listed in Table 2.
The period of one hour is divided into three phases, namely: rest phase, ultrafiltration phase, and refill phase. During rest and refill phases, JF is set to 0 and during ultrafiltration (UF) phase, JUF is set above the regular UF rate.
Hematocrit is initially set at Hct(0)=22 and then Eq. (14) is used to obtain a plot for the model output.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS AND SUBSET SELECTION: Sensitivity analysis and subset selection provide insights on the influence of certain parameters on the model output and on the identifiability of parameters with regard to specific measurements. Further, the information of these analyses can be used for experimental design. It helps in making informed decisions on the type of measurements, the frequency and the precision of the specific measurements needed to identify parameters. In the context of this application, it is important to ensure that with the gathered data it is indeed possible to identify the parameters we are interested in.
Traditional and generalized sensitivity functions: In simulation studies, the traditional sensitivity functions (TSFs) are frequently used to assess the degree of sensitivity of a model output with respect to various parameters on which it depends. It shows what parameters influence the model output the most or the least. The more influential changes in a parameter on the model output, the more important it is to assign accurate values to that parameter. On the other hand, for parameters which are less sensitive it suffices to have a rough estimate for the value. To obtain information content on the parameters, the model output needs to be either a state variable of the system or expressible as one (or more) of the state variables. Here, a relationship is established between the model output (hematocrit) and a state variable (plasma volume Vp) (see above).
The generalized sensitivity functions (GSFs) provide information on the sensitivity of parameter estimates with respect to model parameters. It describes the sensitivity of parameter estimates with respect to the observations or specific measurements. Note, it is assumed that the measurement error is normally distributed with a given standard deviation. Some details on sensitivities are provided in Appendix C. Based on the GSFs, one can assess if the parameters of interest are well-identifiable assuming a priori measurement error, measurement frequency and nominal parameter values.
Sensitivity Equations for the Vascular Refill Model: Let y(t)=Hct(t), i.e. the hematocrit level at time t is defined as the model output (see Eq. (14)). The sensitivity of the model output with respect to the parameter L can be determined as follows
which can be simplified as
Sensitivities with respect to other parameters can be obtained similarly and they are given as
The derivatives of the states with respect to the parameters ∂x(t)/∂pk, ∂Vp(t)/∂Lp, etc. can be found in Appendix C.4.
Subset selection: Before an actual parameter identification is carried out, one can choose a priori which parameters can be estimated given a data set. A subset selection algorithm described in Appendix C.3 and in Cintrón-Arias A, Banks H T, Capaldi A, Lloyd A L “A sensitivity matrix based methodology for inverse problem formulation” J Inv Ill-posed Problems 17:545-564 (2009), the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein, chooses the parameter vectors that can be estimated from a given set of measurements using an ordinary least squares inverse problem formulation. The algorithm requires prior knowledge of a nominal set of values for all parameters along with the observation times for data. Among the given set of parameters, the algorithm searches all possible choices of different parameters and selects those which are identifiable. It minimizes a given uncertainty quantification, for instance, by means of asymptotic standard errors. Overall, subset selection gives information on local identifiability of a parameter set for a given data. Further, it gives a quantification whether a parameter can be identified or not.
The subset selection algorithm is used to select best combination of parameters from the given set of model parameters based on a defined criteria. As mentioned above, prior knowledge of measurement variance σ0, measurement frequency and nominal parameter values θ0 are required. These values are needed to compute the sensitivity matrix, the Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) and the corresponding covariance matrix. In the current study, a selection score α(θ0) is set to be the maximum norm of the coefficients of variation for θ (see Appendix C.3 for more details). The subset of parameters are chosen with the minimal α(θ0). The condition number cond(F(θ0)) determines the ratio between the largest and the smallest eigenvalue of the FIM. If cond(F(θ0)) is too large, FIM is ill-posed and the chosen subset of parameters might be difficult to identify or even unidentifiable.
Table 3 presents the chosen parameters out of the 12 model parameters with the selection score and condition number of the corresponding FIM. It is assumed that measurement can be obtained at the frequency of 10 Hz, the standard error is 0.1 (variance is 0.01) and the nominal parameter values are given in Table 1. Note that Lp, Pc, and σ are the three best parameter combinations chosen. This method suggests that these parameters can be identified given the measurements with properties mentioned earlier.
Since hematocrit is a measurement that can be obtained using the Crit-Line Monitor device (among other ways), some parameters need not be estimated using this observation. Specifically, ap1, ap2, ai1, ai2 are not in top priority to be identified because protein concentration measurements might be necessary for this purpose. Also, the ultrafiltration rate JUF is an outside perturbation introduced in the system which can be set a priori. Table 4 shows the parameter selection of the algorithm choosing from 7 parameters. It is important to note that Lp, Pc, σ are selected which are of significant relevance in this example.
MODEL IDENTIFICATION: Model identifiability is assessed to determine parameters from measured data. The term refers to the issue of ascertaining unambiguous and accurate parameter estimation. Parameter estimation determines a parameter set such that the model output is as close as possible to the corresponding set of observations. This accounts for minimizing a measure of error for the difference between model output and measurements. It should be noted that the quality of the parameter estimates depends on the error criterion, model structure and fidelity of the available data.
To test the adaptability of the current model, a patient's hematocrit data is used. Though the measurement obtained with varying ultrafiltration profiles was originally collected for a different purpose, it can be shown that the present model adapts to the given set of observations despite this limitation. In particular, some key parameters can be identified.
Parameter estimation for Patient 1 data:
Table 5 indicates that for this particular patient data set, Lp and Pc are identifiable. As shown, varied initial parameter values converge to the same estimated values (to some degree of accuracy). It indicates local identifiability of these model parameters.
Parameter estimation for Patient 2 data: Here, data of a different, second patient “2” is used to illustrate the validity of the model. In this case, three parameters, namely, Lp, Pc, and κ are estimated.
Table 6 shows that different initial values of the parameters Lp, Pc, and κ converge to the same estimated values. Thus, it indicates local identifiability of these parameters.
All references, including publications, patent applications, and patents, cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each reference were individually and specifically indicated to be incorporated by reference and were set forth in its entirety herein.
The use of the terms “a” and “an” and “the” and “at least one” and similar referents in the context of describing the invention (especially in the context of the following claims) are to be construed to cover both the singular and the plural, unless otherwise indicated herein or clearly contradicted by context. The use of the term “at least one” followed by a list of one or more items (for example, “at least one of A and B”) is to be construed to mean one item selected from the listed items (A or B) or any combination of two or more of the listed items (A and B), unless otherwise indicated herein or clearly contradicted by context. The terms “comprising,” “having,” “including,” and “containing” are to be construed as open-ended terms (i.e., meaning “including, but not limited to,”) unless otherwise noted. Recitation of ranges of values herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of referring individually to each separate value falling within the range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples, or exemplary language (e.g., “such as”) provided herein, is intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as indicating any non-claimed element as essential to the practice of the invention.
Preferred embodiments of this invention are described herein, including the best mode known to the inventors for carrying out the invention. Variations of those preferred embodiments may become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art upon reading the foregoing description. The inventors expect skilled artisans to employ such variations as appropriate, and the inventors intend for the invention to be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein. Accordingly, this invention includes all modifications and equivalents of the subject matter recited in the claims appended hereto as permitted by applicable law. Moreover, any combination of the above-described elements in all possible variations thereof is encompassed by the invention unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context.
A Quadratic Approximation to Colloid Osmotic Pressures
The colloid osmotic pressure πp, πi in plasma and in the interstitium can be expressed in terms of its respective protein concentrations cp, ci as follows
πp=αp
πi=αi
The coefficients are given by
The quadratic approximations πp.approx(cp)=α1cp+α2cp2 and πi,approx(ci)=β1ci+β2ci2 of πp(cp) and πi(ci) are computed by minimizing
The obtained coefficients αk, βk, k=1, 2, are given by
In
B Computation of Equilibria
Let the colloid osmotic pressures πp, πi in the plasma and the interstitium be given as
πp=αp
πi=αi
where cp respectively ci is the protein concentration in plasma respectively in the interstitium. Assume that the equilibrium πp* value is known. The equilibrium cp can be computed by solving the quadratic equation
ap
Using quadratic formula, the roots of the above equation are
There exists a real root provided that the discriminant αp
−αp
which is trivially satisfied since πp* is always positive.
Assuming all the parameters are known including the constant lymph flow to the plasma κ, the equilibrium interstitial colloid osmotic pressure ci* can be obtained by solving the equilibria of our model. That is, we have
Expressing the πi* in terms of ci yields
As above, in order to obtain a real positive ci*, the following equation needs to be satisfied
The equilibrium value for ci is then given by
C Sensitivities
C.1 Traditional Sensitivities
Let the variable y=y(θ) for θ∈D, where D is some open interval and assume that y is differentiable on D. Let θ0∈D be given and assume that θ0≠0 and y0=y(θ0)≠0. Here, θ0 denotes the initial/nominal parameter and y0 refers to the initial model output. The sensitivity sy(θ0) of y with respect to θ at θ0 is defined as:
The sensitivities sx,θ(θ0) are defined such that they are invariant against changes of units in both θ and y.
In general, we have a dynamical system of the form
where x(t) is the vector of state variables of the system, θ is the vector of system parameters and t∈[0, T]. We define
y(t)=f(t,θ),0≤t≤T,
to be the (single) output of the system.
In order to compute the traditional sensitivity functions (TSF) (sensitivity of a model output with respect to various parameters on which it depends) as well as for the generalized sensitivities (GSF) (sensitivity of parameter estimates with respect to measurements) the so called sensitivity equations are needed. The sensitivity equations are a linear ODE-system of the following form
where x(·) and θ(·) denote the partial derivative of with respect to the state variable x and parameter θ, respectively. Equation (17) in conjunction with (AWP) provides a fast and sufficient way to compute the sensitivity matrix S(t,θ) numerically.
C.2 Generalized Sensitivities
The generalized sensitivity function gS(tl) with respect to the parameter θk at the time instant tl for θ in a neighborhood of θ0 (the initial/nominal parameter vector) is given by
and the Fisher Information Matrix F is given by
where t1, . . . , tN denotes the measurement points.
C.3 Subset Selection Algorithm
Given p<p0, the algorithm taken from the literature considers all possible indices i1, . . . , ip with 1≤ii< . . . <ip≤p0 in lexicographical ordering starting with the first choice (i1(1), . . . , ip(1))=(1, . . . , p) and completes the following steps:
Initializing step: Set indsel=(1, . . . , p) and αsel=∞.
Step k: For the choice (i1(k), . . . , ip(k)) compute r=rank F((q0)i
F is the Fisher information matrix mentioned in the preceding section.
C.4 Sensitivity with Respect to a Parameter
It can be easily verified that the partial derivative of Jv with respect to cp and ci are
respectively. Also, the following can be obtained immediately
The partial derivative of Js with respect to cp when Jv>0 can be derived as follows
When Jv<0, we have
Hence,
Assuming Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to ci is
When Jv<0, we obtain
Therefore,
Let F be a column vector whose entries are the right-hand side of our capillary model, that is,
then the Jacobian of F is given by
If we set u=(Vp, cp, Vi, ci)T and θ=(Lp, σ, PS, Pc, Pi, αp
Sensitivity with Respect to Lp
To derive the sensitivity with respect to Lp, we need
It clearly follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to Lp is derived as
Similar computation applies for Jv<0 and therefore we obtain
Now, the sensitivity equations with respect to Lp are
Sensitivity with Respect to σ
One can easily obtain
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to σ can be obtained as follows
Slight modifications can be obtained when Jv<0. Hence, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to σ can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to PS
Note that
With
it follows that
For both cases, Jv>0 and Jv<0, the partial derivative with respect to PS can be derived as follows
Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to PS can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to Pc
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to Pc is
Similarly,
can be derived when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to Pc can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to Pi
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to Pi is
Similarly,
can be derived when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to Pi can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to αP
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to αp
can be derived in a similar manner when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to αp
Sensitivity with respect to αp
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to αp
can be derived in a similar manner when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to αp
Sensitivity with Respect to ai
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to αi
can be derived in a similar manner when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to αi
Sensitivity with Respect to αi
Note that
With
it follows that
For Jv>0, the partial derivative of Js with respect to αi
can be derived in a similar manner when Jv<0. Thus, we have
The sensitivity equations with respect to αi
Sensitivity with Respect to κ
Note that
With
it follows that
The sensitivity equations with respect to κ can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to α
Note that
With
it follows that
The sensitivity equations with respect to α can be obtained as follows
Sensitivity with Respect to JUF
Note that
With
it follows that
The sensitivity equations with respect to JUF can be obtained as follows
This patent application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/309,727, filed Nov. 8, 2016, which is a national phase of International Patent Application No. PCT/US2015/033225, filed May 29, 2015, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/005,744, filed May 30, 2014. All of the aforementioned patent applications are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
8741147 | Bene | Jun 2014 | B2 |
10569000 | De Los Reyes, V | Feb 2020 | B2 |
20060183988 | Baker et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070215545 | Bissler | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20120029324 | Akonur | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120150102 | Childers | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130331712 | Moissl et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140042092 | Akonur | Feb 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
103250156 | Aug 2013 | CN |
103262085 | Aug 2013 | CN |
203354985 | Dec 2013 | CN |
WO 2012054880 | Apr 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Banks et al., “Parameter Selection Methods in Inverse Problem Formation,” in Mathematical Modeling and Validation in Physiology, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, 43-73 (2013). |
Banks et al., J. Inv. III-Posed Problems, 18, 25-83 (2010). |
Batzel et al., “Merging Mathematical and Physiological Knowledge: Dimensions and Challenges,” in in Mathematical Modeling and Validation in Physiology, Lecture Notes in Mathematic, Springer-Verlag, 3-19 (2013). |
Bauer, Clin. Nephrol., 16(3), 114-118 (1981). |
Brennan et al., Kidney Int., 17(3), 364-371 (1980). |
Brenner et al., Kidney Int., 2(1), 51-53 (1972). |
Chamney et al., J. Med. Eng. Technol., 23(2), 45-52 (1999). |
Cintrón-Arias et al., J. Inv. III-Posed Problems, 17 545-564 (2009). |
De Los Reyes et al., J. Theoretical Biol., 390, 146-155 (2016). |
Dvorak, Curr. Opin. Hematol., 17(3), 225-229 (2010). |
Ebah et al., Kidney Int., 84(5) 980-988 (2013). |
Fauchald, Kidney Int., 29(4), 895-900 (1986). |
Gore et al., Fed. Proc., 34(11), 2031-2037 (1975). |
Guyton, Circ. Res., 16, 452-460 (1965). |
Harper et al., Kidney Int., 61(4), 1416-1422 (2002). |
Heldt et al., “Mathematical Modeling of Physiological Systems,” in Mathematical Modeling and Validation in Physiology, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, 21-41 (2013). |
Iimura et al., Nephron, 74(1), 19-25 (1996). |
Järhult et al., Acta Physiol. Scand., 91 (1), 32-41 (1974). |
Johnson et al., J. Applied Physiology, 17, 503-508 (1962). |
Koomans et al., Kidney Int., 26(6), 848-854 (1984). |
Landis et al., “Exchange of Substances Through the Capillary Walls,” in Handbook of Physiology, American Physiological Society, Washington DC, 961-1034 (1963). |
Levick , Exp. Physiology, 76(6), 825-857 (1991). |
Levick et al., Cardiovascular Research, 87(2), 198-210 (2010). |
Michel et al., Physiological Reviews, 79(3), 703-761 (1999). |
Navar et al., Am. J. Physiology—Heart and Circulatory Physiology, 233(2), H295-H298 (1977). |
Nitta et al., Tohoku J. Exp. Med., 135(1), 43-49 (1981). |
Ookawara et al., Therapeutic Apheresis and Dialysis, 18(2), 202-207 (2014). |
Renkin, Am. J. Physiology, 250(5), H706-H710 (1986). |
Rodriguez et al., Kidney Int., 68(2), 854-861 (Aug. 2005). |
Schneditz et al., Kidney Int., 42, 1425-1433 (1992). |
Starling E.H., J Physiol., 19(4), 312-326 (1896). |
Staverman, “The Theory of Measurement of Osmotic Pressure,” Recueil des Travaux himiques des Pays-Bas, 70(4), 344-352 (1951). |
Tabei et al., Nephron, 74(2), 266-274 (1996). |
Taylor et al., “Exchange of Macromolecules Across the Microcirculation,” in Handbook of Physiology, vol. 4, 467-520, American Physiological Society, Bethesda, MD (1984). |
Thijssen et al., Blood Purif, 33, 165-170 (2012). |
Thomaseth et al., Ann Biomed Eng., 27(5), 607-616 (1999). |
Titze, Kidney Int., 84(5), 869-871 (Nov. 2013). |
Williams et al., Clin Sci (Lond), 79(1), 5-8 (1990). |
Yashiro et al., Blood Purif, 23(6), 431-439 (2005). |
Zellweger et al., ASAIO J., 50(3), 242-245 (2004). |
Chinese Patent Application No. 201580028906.7, Office Action (dated Feb. 1, 2019). |
European Patent Application No. 15799738.8, Search Report (dated Jan. 11, 2018). |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/309,727, filed Nov. 8, 2016. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200139034 A1 | May 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62005744 | May 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15309727 | US | |
Child | 16737563 | US |