ASN's Mission

ASN leads the fight to prevent, treat, and cure kidney diseases throughout the world by educating health professionals and scientists, advancing research and innovation, communicating new knowledge, and advocating for the highest quality care for patients.

learn more

Contact ASN

1401 H St, NW, Ste 900, Washington, DC 20005

email@asn-online.org

202-640-4660

The Latest on Twitter

Kidney Week

Abstract: PO0305

A Simplified Fluid Dynamics Model of Ultrafiltration

Session Information

  • Bioengineering
    October 22, 2020 | Location: On-Demand
    Abstract Time: 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM

Category: Bioengineering

  • 300 Bioengineering

Authors

  • Cardimino, Christopher R., University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, United States
  • Germain, Michael J., Renal and Transplant Associates of New England, Springfield, Massachusetts, United States
  • Chait, Yossi, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, United States
Background

We recently presented a novel approach for the design of personalized ultrafiltration rate (UFR) profiles during hemodialysis (HD) treatments. The success of this approach depends on an accurate parameter estimation of a simplified fluid volume dynamics during ultrafiltration.

Methods

We used a simplified model derived from a validated fluid volume model during HD comprising intravascular and interstitial pools, microvascular refilling/filtration, and lymphatic flow. Input data used for parameter estimation are UFR profile and hematocrit (HCT) from CLIC obtained during actual HD treatments. Estimation was based on initial 30-min segment of the data and the model was validated based on the subsequent 30-min response. Model time constant and steady-state gain were obtained for a single patient at 5 treatments over a 3-week period.

Results

Estimation/validation results (Figure 1) demonstrate reasonable accuracy of the simplified fluid dynamics model. Underlying model parameters of a single patient exhibit significant variability between similar days of treatment and between treatment days (Figure 2). Both HCT response to same UFR profile (steady-state gain) and response time (time constant) vary by as much as 100%.

Conclusion

Successful estimation of fluid volume model parameters during HD is feasible which supports the concept of online design of personalized UFR profiles, A non-negligible variability of a patient’s model parameters may complicate the design of personalized UFR profiles.

Figure 1

Figure 2