A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Global sensitivity analysis of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement with a stochastic computational model of the hepatic circulation. | LitMetric

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is a widely employed surrogate of portal pressure gradient (PPG) in the diagnosis of portal hypertension (PHT). However, little is known about how HVPG measurement is affected by the complex vascular changes associated with PHT. In this study, we employed a computational method to quantitatively evaluate the sensitivity of HVPG measurement to various vascular factors involved in the development of sinusoidal PHT, aiming to provide a theoretical reference to guide the clinical application of HVPG measurement. The method consisted of developing a lumped-parameter model of the hepatic circulation to simulate HVPG measurement, stochastic parameter sampling used to represent a wide range of pathological conditions, and global sensitivity analysis performed to identify factors that dominate the accuracy of HVPG measurement. The major findings included 1) presinusoidal portal vascular resistance (R) and splanchnic vascular resistance (R) were the major factors determining the relative difference (E) between HVPG and PPG; 2) hepatic arteriolar resistance and portosystemic collateral resistance had little influence on E although they relate closely to the severity of PHT; and 3) postsinusoidal vascular resistance (R) only mildly affected E, despite its marked influence on HVPG and PPG. Moreover, stochastic simulations calibrated to HVPG/PPG data measured in a patient cohort revealed that misdiagnosis of clinically significant PHT with HVPG was more likely to occur in the presence of high R combined with low R and R. These findings suggest that understanding patient-specific vascular conditions can help to improve the application or interpretation of HVPG measurement.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.04.017DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

hvpg measurement
28
pressure gradient
12
vascular resistance
12
hvpg
11
global sensitivity
8
sensitivity analysis
8
hepatic venous
8
venous pressure
8
gradient hvpg
8
measurement stochastic
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!