ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2019
Closed-loop vasopressor control: in-silico study of robustness against pharmacodynamic variability.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tight control of mean arterial pressure using a closed loop system for norepinephrine infusion after high-risk abdominal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024Trial
- Control of mean arterial pressure using a closed-loop system for norepinephrine infusion in severe brain injury patients: the COMAT randomized controlled trial.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024Trial
- Computer-assisted Individualized Hemodynamic Management Reduces Intraoperative Hypotension in Intermediate- and High-risk Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Anesthesiology · 2021Trial
- Automated closed-loop versus manually controlled norepinephrine infusion in patients undergoing intermediate- to high-risk abdominal surgery: a randomised controlled trial.British journal of anaesthesia · 2021Trial
- Development of a vasopressor control module for testing hemorrhagic shock resuscitation controllers.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Article
- Comparative Assessment of In Vivo and In Silico Evaluation of Automated Fluid Resuscitation Controllers.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Personalized pulse wave propagation modeling to improve vasopressor dosing management in patients with severe traumatic brain injury.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Review
- Systolic Arterial Pressure Control Using an Automated Closed-Loop System for Vasopressor Infusion during Intermediate-to-High-Risk Surgery: A Feasibility Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Performance of closed-loop resuscitation in a pig model of haemorrhagic shock with fluid alone or in combination with norepinephrine, a pilot study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2021Article
- Feasibility of computer-assisted vasopressor infusion using continuous non-invasive blood pressure monitoring in high-risk patients undergoing renal transplant surgery.Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2020Article
- Hydroxyethyl starch for perioperative goal-directed fluid therapy in 2020: a narrative review.BMC anesthesiology · 2020Review
- Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing end of year summary 2019: hemodynamic monitoring and management.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Review
- Automated systems for perioperative goal-directed hemodynamic therapy.Journal of anesthesia · 2020Review
- Feasibility of closed-loop titration of norepinephrine infusion in patients undergoing moderate- and high-risk surgery.British journal of anaesthesia · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Initial feasibility of a novel closed-loop controller created by our group for closed-loop control of vasopressor infusions has been previously described. In clinical practice, vasopressor potency may be affected by a variety of factors including other pharmacologic agents, organ dysfunction, and vasoplegic states. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate the effectiveness of our controller in the face of large variations in drug potency, where 'effective' was defined as convergence on target pressure over time. We hypothesized that the controller would remain effective in the face up to a tenfold variability in drug response. To perform the robustness study, our physiologic simulator was used to create randomized simulated septic patients. 250 simulated patients were managed by the closed-loop in each of 7 norepinephrine responsiveness conditions: 0.1 ×, 0.2 ×, 0.5 ×, 1 ×, 2 ×, 5 ×, and 10 × expected population response to drug dose. Controller performance was evaluated for each level of norepinephrine response using Varvel's criteria as well as time-out-of-target. Median performance error and median absolute performance error were less than 5% in all response levels. Wobble was below 3% and divergence remained negative (i.e. the controller tended to converge towards the target over time) in all norepinephrine response levels, but at the highest response level of 10 × the value approached zero, suggesting the controller may be approaching instability. Response levels of 0.1 × and 0.2 × exhibited significantly higher time-out-of-target in the lower ranges (p < 0.001) compared to the 1 × response level as the controller was slower to correct the initial hypotension. In this simulation study, the closed-loop vasopressor controller remained effective in simulated patients exhibiting 0.1 to 10 × the expected population drug response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.