Literature DB >> 21288592

A physiological Intensive Control Insulin-Nutrition-Glucose (ICING) model validated in critically ill patients.

Jessica Lin1, Normy N Razak, Christopher G Pretty, Aaron Le Compte, Paul Docherty, Jacquelyn D Parente, Geoffrey M Shaw, Christopher E Hann, J Geoffrey Chase.   

Abstract

Intensive insulin therapy (IIT) and tight glycaemic control (TGC), particularly in intensive care unit (ICU), are the subjects of increasing and controversial debate in recent years. Model-based TGC has shown potential in delivering safe and tight glycaemic management, all the while limiting hypoglycaemia. A comprehensive, more physiologically relevant Intensive Control Insulin-Nutrition-Glucose (ICING) model is presented and validated using data from critically ill patients. Two existing glucose-insulin models are reviewed and formed the basis for the ICING model. Model limitations are discussed with respect to relevant physiology, pharmacodynamics and TGC practicality. Model identifiability issues are carefully considered for clinical settings. This article also contains significant reference to relevant physiology and clinical literature, as well as some references to the modeling efforts in this field. Identification of critical constant population parameters was performed in two stages, thus addressing model identifiability issues. Model predictive performance is the primary factor for optimizing population parameter values. The use of population values are necessary due to the limited clinical data available at the bedside in the clinical control scenario. Insulin sensitivity, S(I), the only dynamic, time-varying parameter, is identified hourly for each individual. All population parameters are justified physiologically and with respect to values reported in the clinical literature. A parameter sensitivity study confirms the validity of limiting time-varying parameters to S(I) only, as well as the choices for the population parameters. The ICING model achieves median fitting error of <1% over data from 173 patients (N=42,941 h in total) who received insulin while in the ICU and stayed for ≥ 72 h. Most importantly, the median per-patient 1-h ahead prediction error is a very low 2.80% [IQR 1.18, 6.41%]. It is significant that the 75th percentile prediction error is within the lower bound of typical glucometer measurement errors of 7-12%. These results confirm that the ICING model is suitable for developing model-based insulin therapies, and capable of delivering real-time model-based TGC with a very tight prediction error range. Finally, the detailed examination and discussion of issues surrounding model-based TGC and existing glucose-insulin models render this article a mini-review of the state of model-based TGC in critical care.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21288592     DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2010.12.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed        ISSN: 0169-2607            Impact factor:   5.428


  29 in total

1.  Estimating Increased EGP During Stress Response in Critically Ill Patients.

Authors:  Jennifer J Ormsbee; Jennifer L Knopp; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-06-01

2.  Interpretation of Retrospective BG Measurements.

Authors:  Kent W Stewart; Christopher G Pretty; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-07-12

3.  Identifiability Analysis of Three Control-Oriented Models for Use in Artificial Pancreas Systems.

Authors:  Jose Garcia-Tirado; Christian Zuluaga-Bedoya; Marc D Breton
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-08-10

4.  Evolution of insulin sensitivity and its variability in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated with hypothermia.

Authors:  Azurahisham Sah Pri; J Geoffrey Chase; Christopher G Pretty; Geoffrey M Shaw; Jean-Charles Preiser; Jean-Louis Vincent; Mauro Oddo; Fabio S Taccone; Sophie Penning; Thomas Desaive
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 9.097

5.  Evaluation of pharmacokinetic model designs for subcutaneous infusion of insulin aspart.

Authors:  Erin J Mansell; Signe Schmidt; Paul D Docherty; Kirsten Nørgaard; John B Jørgensen; Henrik Madsen
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 2.745

6.  The parameter Houlihan: A solution to high-throughput identifiability indeterminacy for brutally ill-posed problems.

Authors:  David J Albers; Matthew E Levine; Lena Mamykina; George Hripcsak
Journal:  Math Biosci       Date:  2019-08-24       Impact factor: 2.144

7.  Accuracy of Blood Glucose Measurement and Blood Glucose Targets.

Authors:  Gert-Jan Eerdekens; Steffen Rex; Dieter Mesotten
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-02-11

8.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring Measures Can Be Used for Glycemic Control in the ICU: An In-Silico Study.

Authors:  Tony Zhou; Jennifer L Dickson; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2017-11-06

9.  Assessment of Glycemic Control Protocol (STAR) Through Compliance Analysis Amongst Malaysian ICU Patients.

Authors:  Athirah Abdul Razak; Asma Abu-Samah; Normy Norfiza Abdul Razak; Ummu Jamaludin; Fatanah Suhaimi; Azrina Ralib; Mohd Basri Mat Nor; Christopher Pretty; Jennifer Laura Knopp; James Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2020-06-04

10.  Increased insulin resistance in intensive care: longitudinal retrospective analysis of glycaemic control patients in a New Zealand ICU.

Authors:  Jennifer L Knopp; J Geoffrey Chase; Geoffrey M Shaw
Journal:  Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 3.565

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.