Randomized Crossover Comparison of Personalized MPC and PID Control Algorithms for the Artificial Pancreas

被引:97
|
作者
Pinsker, Jordan E. [1 ]
Lee, Joon Bok [1 ,2 ]
Dassau, Eyal [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Seborg, Dale E. [1 ,2 ]
Bradley, Paige K. [1 ]
Gondhalekar, Ravi [1 ,2 ]
Bevier, Wendy C. [1 ]
Huyett, Lauren [1 ,2 ]
Zisser, Howard C. [1 ,2 ]
Doyle, Francis J., III [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] William Sansum Diabet Ctr, Santa Barbara, CA 93105 USA
[2] Univ Calif Santa Barbara, Dept Chem Engn, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA
[3] Harvard Univ, John A Paulson Sch Engn & Appl Sci, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
CLOSED-LOOP CONTROL; GLUCOSE CONTROL; CLINICAL-EVALUATION; GLYCEMIC CONTROL; TYPE-1; TRIAL; SYSTEM; SAFETY; MEAL;
D O I
10.2337/dc15-2344
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE To evaluate two widely used control algorithms for an artificial pancreas (AP) under nonideal but comparable clinical conditions. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS After a pilot safety and feasibility study (n = 10), closed-loop control (CLC) was evaluated in a randomized, crossover trial of 20 additional adults with type 1 diabetes. Personalized model predictive control (MPC) and proportional integral derivative (PID) algorithms were compared in supervised 27.5-h CLC sessions. Challenges included overnight control after a 65-g dinner, response to a 50-g breakfast, and response to an unannounced 65-g lunch. Boluses of announced dinner and breakfast meals were given at mealtime. The primary outcome was time in glucose range 70-180 mg/dL. RESULTS Mean time in range 70-180 mg/dL was greater for MPC than for PID (74.4 vs. 63.7%, P = 0.020). Mean glucose was also lower for MPC than PID during the entire trial duration (138 vs. 160 mg/dL, P = 0.012) and 5 h after the unannounced 65-g meal (181 vs. 220 mg/dL, P = 0.019). There was no significant difference in time with glucose < 70 mg/dL throughout the trial period. CONCLUSIONS This first comprehensive study to compare MPC and PID control for the AP indicates that MPC performed particularly well, achieving nearly 75% time in the target range, including the unannounced meal. Although both forms of CLC provided safe and effective glucose management, MPC performed as well or better than PID in all metrics.
引用
收藏
页码:1135 / 1142
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial Comparing MPC and PID Control Algorithms for Artificial Pancreas
    Lee, Joon Bok
    Pinsker, Jordan E.
    Dassau, Eyal
    Seborg, Dale E.
    Bradley, Paige K.
    Gondhalekar, Ravi
    Bevier, Wendy
    Huyett, Lauren
    Zisser, Howard C.
    Doyle, Francis J., III
    DIABETES, 2016, 65 : A21 - A21
  • [2] Randomized Crossover Comparison of Personalized MPC and PID Control Algorithms for the Artificial Pancreas. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1135-1142
    Steil, Garry M.
    DIABETES CARE, 2017, 40 (01) : E3 - E3
  • [3] Clinical Comparison of MPC and PID Artificial Pancreas Controllers: A Randomized Crossover Trial
    Lee, Joon Bok
    Pinsker, Jordan E.
    Dassau, Eyal
    Seborg, Dale E.
    Castorino, Kristin
    Gondhalekar, Ravi
    Bevier, Wendy C.
    Bradley, Paige K.
    Zisser, Howard C.
    Doyle, Francis J., III
    DIABETES, 2015, 64 : A275 - A275
  • [4] Implementation of MPC and PID Control Algorithms to the Artificial Pancreas for Diabetes Mellitus Type 1
    Matamoros-Alcivar, Esther
    Ascencio-Lino, Tanya
    Fonseca, Rigoberto
    Villalba-Meneses, Gandhi
    Tirado-Espin, Andres
    Barona, Lorena
    Almeida-Galarraga, Diego
    2021 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MACHINE LEARNING AND APPLIED NETWORK TECHNOLOGIES (ICMLANT II), 2021, : 139 - 144
  • [5] Understanding the Benefits of Glucagon in the Artificial Pancreas: Randomized Crossover Trial
    Haidar, Ahmad
    Legault, Laurent
    Pinaroc, Cherylene
    Messier, Virginie
    Mitre, Tina
    Leroux, Catherine
    Boulet, Benoit
    Rabasa-Lhoret, Remi
    DIABETES, 2014, 63 : A62 - A62
  • [6] Multicenter Outpatient Randomized Crossover Trial of Zone-MPC Artificial Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes: Effects of Initialization Strategies
    Dassau, Eyal
    Brown, Sue A.
    Basu, Ananda
    Pinsker, Jordan E.
    Kudva, Yogish C.
    Gondhalekar, Ravi
    Patek, Steve
    Lv, Dayu
    Schiavon, Michele
    Lee, Joon Bok
    Dalla Man, Chiara
    Kovatchev, Boris P.
    Cobelli, Claudio
    Zisser, Howard C.
    Doyle, Francis J.
    DIABETES, 2015, 64 : A59 - A60
  • [7] Comparison of control algorithms for the blood glucose concentration in a virtual patient with an artificial pancreas
    Semizer, E.
    Yuceer, M.
    Atasoy, I.
    Berber, R.
    CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH & DESIGN, 2012, 90 (07): : 926 - 937
  • [8] Comparison of Inverted Pendulum Stabilization with PID, LQ, and MPC Control
    Bakarac, Peter
    Klauco, Martin
    Fikar, Miroslav
    2018 CYBERNETICS & INFORMATICS (K&I), 2018,
  • [9] Safety of Outpatient Closed-Loop Control: First Randomized Crossover Trials of a Wearable Artificial Pancreas
    Kovatchev, Boris P.
    Renard, Eric
    Cobelli, Claudio
    Zisser, Howard C.
    Keith-Hynes, Patrick
    Anderson, Stacey M.
    Brown, Sue A.
    Chernavvsky, Daniel R.
    Breton, Marc D.
    Mize, Lloyd B.
    Farret, Anne
    Place, Jerome
    Bruttomesso, Daniela
    Del Favero, Simone
    Boscari, Federico
    Galasso, Silvia
    Avogaro, Angelo
    Magni, Lalo
    Di Palma, Federico
    Toffanin, Chiara
    Messori, Mirko
    Dassau, Eyal
    Doyle, Francis J., III
    DIABETES CARE, 2014, 37 (07) : 1789 - 1796
  • [10] A Comparison of LQR and MPC Control Algorithms of an Inverted Pendulum
    Jezierski, Andrzej
    Mozaryn, Jakub
    Suski, Damian
    TRENDS IN ADVANCED INTELLIGENT CONTROL, OPTIMIZATION AND AUTOMATION, 2017, 577 : 65 - 76