ライフサイエンスコーパス: Giemsa stain

1 and the presence of gastric H. pylori using Giemsa stain.

2 the Apis mellifera karyotype as revealed by Giemsa stain.

3 immunofluorescence, electron microscopy, and Giemsa staining.

4 by flow cytometric analysis and May-Grunwald Giemsa staining.

5 s the parasitemia detection rate compared to Giemsa staining (90%), it offers a significant advantage

6 Biopsy-based tests (i.e., culture, histology Giemsa stain and rapid urease test) and non-invasive tes

7 the cultures were monitored for infection by Giemsa staining and PCR.

8 ith clinical symptoms of malaria, a positive Giemsa-stained blood film for P falciparum, and no signs

9 ted PCR assay and microscopic examination of Giemsa-stained blood films for detection and identificat

10 mated blood culture, malaria microscopy with Giemsa-stained blood films, and human immunodeficiency v

11 was as sensitive and specific as the use of Giemsa-stained blood smears and inoculation of hamsters.

12 d objective supplement to the examination of Giemsa-stained blood smears and may replace microscopy f

13 ts for duplicate microscopic examinations of Giemsa-stained blood smears as the reference diagnostic

14 Microscopic diagnosis of malaria using Giemsa-stained blood smears is the standard of care in r

15 Parasitemia was monitored on Giemsa-stained blood smears or by flow cytometry.

16 ency of infected red blood cells assessed on Giemsa-stained blood smears.

17 roperties of cells, morphological studies of Giemsa-stained cells, annexin V binding, and DNA fragmen

18 hin 2 weeks, infected cells were detected in Giemsa-stained culture samples, and the organisms subseq

19 aplasma-like inclusions were demonstrated in Giemsa-stained culture samples.

20 osinophils, they were purified (>95% pure by Giemsa-stained cytospin preparations) from liver granulo

21 ity (CIN) induced by CHEK1 were confirmed by Giemsa staining, exon sequencing, immunofluorescence and

22 H&E staining for histology and modified Giemsa staining for the detection of H. pylori was condu

23 itivity of 54% and a specificity of 87%; and Giemsa stain (> 2% ICO) had a sensitivity of 46% and a s

24 nal method, i.e., microscopic examination of Giemsa-stained lesion scraping (46.7%), biopsy culture (

25 at a dosage of 10 mg/kg/day as determined by Giemsa-stained organ impression smears.

26 detection remains basic light microscopy of Giemsa-stained patient blood smears to first enable dete

27 Standard malaria diagnosis is Giemsa stained peripheral blood smear but false negative

28 ted 4 to 5 hours earlier than it was seen in Giemsa-stained preparations and 8 hours earlier than it

29 e frequency of induced chromatid breakage in Giemsa-stained preparations was determined.

30 Giemsa stain revealed that BI were aggregates of mesench

31 For Giemsa stained sections, the decision support algorithm

32 tiation was based on microscopic analysis of Giemsa-stained slides.

33 ng superior performance over manually-scored Giemsa-stained smears, and a limit of detection below 0.

34 they were younger than 180 months and had a Giemsa-stained thick blood smear that was positive for P

35 PCR-HRM analysis of DNA extracts from Giemsa-stained thick blood smears or corresponding blood

36 btained by reading 100 fields of traditional Giemsa-stained thick-smear blood films.

37 iosis was made by microscopic examination of Giemsa-stained thin blood smears or a real-time polymera

38 icroscopic identification of the organism in Giemsa-stained thin blood smears, detection of babesial

39 s with atrophy, the sensitivity of histology Giemsa stain was 100%, 100%, 88%, and 66%, respectively,