| Literature DB >> 21906388 |
James A Revie1, David J Stevenson, J Geoffrey Chase, Christopher E Hann, Bernard C Lambermont, Alexandre Ghuysen, Philippe Kolh, Philippe Morimont, Geoffrey M Shaw, Thomas Desaive.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic ability of computer-based methods for cardiovascular system (CVS) monitoring offers significant clinical potential. This research tests the clinical applicability of a newly improved computer-based method for the proof of concept case of tracking changes in important hemodynamic indices due to the influence acute pulmonary embolism (APE).Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21906388 PMCID: PMC3224493 DOI: 10.1186/2110-5820-1-33
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Intensive Care ISSN: 2110-5820 Impact factor: 6.925
Figure 1Proposed usage of model-based monitoring techniques.
Figure 2Overview of the six-chamber cardiovascular model.
Figure 3Comparison of the modeled to measured left ventricular pressure waveform, volume waveform, and pressure-volume loops for pig 4 at 30, 120, and 210 minutes into the trial. The dashed line shows the measured waveform and the solid line the CVS model output.
Figure 4Comparison of the modeled to measured right ventricular pressure waveform, volume waveform, and pressure-volume loops for pig 4 at 30, 120, and 210 minutes into the trial. The dashed line shows the measured waveform and the solid line the CVS model output.
Median and 90th percentile absolute percentage errors of the model outputs compared to measured data.
| Output | Error | Pig 1 | Pig 2 | Pig 3 | Pig 4 | Pig 5 | All |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | ||
| 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.4 | ||
| 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | ||
| 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | ||
| 3.3 | 18.2 | 4.3 | 2.5 | 1.9 | 4.1 | ||
| 15.9 | 22.8 | 7.0 | 6.5 | 4.6 | 17.4 | ||
| 6.5 | 15.8 | 4.3 | 2.6 | 1.9 | 4.4 | ||
| 14.6 | 18.9 | 7.4 | 7.0 | 6.9 | 15.3 | ||
| 11.4 | 9.2 | 2.7 | 1.5 | 1.7 | 2.1 | ||
| 27.8 | 23.5 | 4.5 | 3.1 | 2.5 | 20.5 | ||
| 15.5 | 30.6 | 3.7 | 2.7 | 18.4 | 15.1 | ||
| 18.3 | 31.6 | 15.6 | 5.7 | 23.3 | 27.2 |
Mean aortic and pulmonary artery pressures (P) are used in the identification process, whereas the left and right ventricular volumes (LVEDV, RVEDV), and maximum left and right ventricular pressures, (P, P) were not for identification and are true validations
Accuracy and precision of the estimated left and right ventricular volumes (LVEDV, RVEDV), and maximum left and right ventricular pressures (P)
| Output | Error | Pig 1 | Pig 2 | Pig 3 | Pig 4 | Pig 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -2.1 | -11.1 | 1.2 | 0.5 | -0.8 | ||
| 8.7 | 9.6 | 7.1 | 5.8 | 3.5 | ||
| 3.9 | 11.2 | 0.7 | -0.4 | 2.6 | ||
| 9.8 | 9.1 | 6 | 5.9 | 3.5 | ||
| -10 | -16 | 3.6 | 0.8 | 2.2 | ||
| 20.9 | 18.1 | 4.5 | 5 | 3 | ||
| 8.1 | 18.7 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 13.6 | ||
| 4.8 | 2.4 | 6.8 | 3.4 | 7 |
Figure 5Identified subject-specific pulmonary resistance ([23](bottom).
Figure 6Identified subject-specific maximum right ventricular pressure (.
Figure 7Identified right ventricular expansion index (RVEI, defined as RVEDV/LVEDV) during the porcine trials (top) and comparison of the modeled to measured mean RVEI (bottom).
Figure 8Identified subject specific right ventricle end systolic elastance (.