Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Urea kinetic modeling: comparing the options

N A Hoenich1, M J Keir, K Hildreth

  • 1Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Medical Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.

Artificial Organs
|September 1, 1993
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A comparative study of pharyngolaryngectomy free flap reconstruction: A 12-year retrospective analysis at a single center.

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS·2025
Same author

Outcomes of skin cancer excision in frail patients: A retrospective cohort study.

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS·2023
Same author

Dealing with Careless Responding in Survey Data: Prevention, Identification, and Recommended Best Practices.

Annual review of psychology·2022
Same author

A systematic review of observational management of cutaneous basal cell carcinoma.

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS·2022
Same author

Trends in mortality from aortic dissection analyzed from the World Health Organization Mortality Database from 2000 to 2017.

International journal of cardiology·2022
Same author

Mortality from abdominal aortic aneurysm: trends in European Union 15+ countries from 1990 to 2017.

The British journal of surgery·2020
Same journal

Large-Eddy Simulation of the FDA Benchmark Blood Pump: Validation Against Experiments and Implications for Turbulent Flow Mechanisms.

Artificial organs·2026
Same journal

The Warm Revolution: A Meta-Analysis of DCD Versus DBD Liver Transplant Outcomes in the Normothermic Machine Perfusion Era.

Artificial organs·2026
Same journal

Toward Optimal Remote Monitoring in LVAD Recipients: Remaining Challenges Beyond Feasibility.

Artificial organs·2026
Same journal

Advancing Organ Preservation and Perfusion: Introducing the International Society of Organ Preservation and Perfusion Therapy (ISOPPT).

Artificial organs·2026
Same journal

Short Inter-Treatment Interval Treatment With Artificial Liver Support System Reduces 90-Day Transplant-Free Mortality in Patients With Hepatitis B Virus-Related Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure: A Retrospective Observational Study.

Artificial organs·2026
Same journal

Extracorporeal Albumin Dialysis (OPAL) as Novel Therapeutic Bridging Option in Posthepatectomy Liver Failure.

Artificial organs·2026
See all related articles

Comparing 6 urea kinetic modeling packages revealed variations in urea generation rate (G) and distribution volume (V) due to different numerical methods. Caution is advised when comparing Kt/V and normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR) results across packages.

Area of Science:

  • Nephrology
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Mathematical Modeling

Background:

  • Urea kinetic modeling is crucial for assessing hemodialysis adequacy.
  • Standardized methods are needed for reliable patient data interpretation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance of 6 commercial urea kinetic modeling packages.
  • To evaluate variations in derived kinetic parameters (G, V, Kt/V, nPCR).

Main Methods:

  • Applied identical patient data to 6 different kinetic modeling packages.
  • Utilized a variable volume, single pool urea model.
  • Analyzed parameters including urea generation rate (G), distribution volume (V), Kt/V, and normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR).

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Significant differences were observed in urea generation rate (G) and distribution volume (V) between packages.
  • These discrepancies stem from variations in numerical methods and clearance calculations.
  • Broad agreement was found for Kt/V and normalized protein catabolic rate (nPCR), but with notable 95% limits of agreement.

Conclusions:

  • Different urea kinetic modeling packages yield varying results for G and V.
  • Exercise caution when comparing Kt/V and nPCR values obtained from different software.
  • Standardization of numerical methods in kinetic modeling packages is recommended.