ライフサイエンスコーパス: common bile duct

1 liver injury was induced by ligation of the common bile duct.

2 the second portion of the duodenum, and the common bile duct.

3 nd distal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 24 of 28 [86%]) common bile duct.

4 li syndrome, and 30% had an isolated dilated common bile duct.

5 ry obstruction in mice with ligations of the common bile duct.

6 17%) of these cases there were stones in the common bile duct, 40 patients were randomised to LECBD a

7 95%) and shape (70% and 100%), and an absent common bile duct (93% and 92%).

8 tionally, diameters of main pancreatic duct, common bile duct and angles between main pancreatic duct

9 The common bile duct and common hepatic duct were adequately

10 duct and angles between main pancreatic duct-common bile duct and cystic duct-common bile duct were c

11 s filled with a silicone polymer through the common bile duct and each liver lobe embedded in Bioplas

12 the pancreatic head presented regularly with common bile duct and gastric outlet obstruction.

13 Although the parasite loads in the common bile duct and large intestine were not significan

14 variations of gallbladder, cystic duct (CD), common bile duct and main pancreatic duct and their cour

15 The common bile duct and main portal vein were maintained wi

16 ediated gene transfer, 2) obstruction of the common bile duct, and 3) intravenous infusions of tauroc

17 vasion of duodenum, ampulla of Vater, and/or common bile duct, and an additional tumor invaded the po

18 ns were generated along the pancreatic duct, common bile duct, and major mesenteric vessels.

19 oise in the azygos vein, right hepatic vein, common bile duct, and superior mesenteric artery.

20 respectively; P > .39 for both readers), in common bile duct area (20.7 vs 21.5 mm(2), for reader 1

21 The level at which cystic duct opened to common bile duct (as in proximal-mid-distal 1/3) and typ

22 ations (unintended wounds or injuries to the common bile duct, bowel, blood vessel(s), or other organ

23 uality parameters in the pancreatic duct and common bile duct by using a five-point scale.

24 43%), ampullary cancer (n = 70; 11%), distal common bile duct cancer (n = 65; 10%), duodenal cancer (

25 duct combines with hepatic ducts to form the common bile duct (CBD) and continues along the CBD.

26 opancreatography (ERCP), sphincterotomy, and common bile duct (CBD) clearance followed by laparoscopi

27 98.2% patients were symptomatic and median common bile duct (CBD) diameter was 13 mm.

28 The treatment of common bile duct (CBD) disorders, such as biliary atresi

29 olangiography (IOC) may decrease the risk of common bile duct (CBD) injury during cholecystectomy by

30 Common bile duct (CBD) injury during cholecystectomy is

31 Dilatation of common bile duct (CBD) is mostly pathological and mainly

32 The phenotype of T cells associated with the common bile duct (CBD) is unknown.

33 AIMS: Algorithms for diagnosis of malignant common bile duct (CBD) stenoses are complex and lack acc

34 The role of common bile duct (CBD) stenting in the establishment of

35 creatography (ERCP) can result in failure of common bile duct (CBD) stone removal and pancreatitis.

36 n 67% of patients with intermediate risk for common bile duct (CBD) stones require therapeutic interv

37 tis is often associated with the presence of common bile duct (CBD) stones that may require endoscopi

38 Twenty-seven of these patients (64%) had common bile duct (CBD) stones, which were cleared with a

39 ter were associated with recurrent and giant common bile duct (CBD) stones.

40 amination findings suggesting a stone in the common bile duct (CBD), but these factors are not highly

41 rigin, namely, the duodenum, ampulla, distal common bile duct (CBD), or head of the pancreas.

42 vein to the microvascular blood flow in the common bile duct (CBD).

43 re was no significant difference in the mean common bile duct diameter (4.1 vs 4.3 mm for reader 1 an

44 Two independent readers recorded common bile duct diameter and area on axial CT images.

45 actors include anatomic (main pancreatic and common bile duct diameters), tumor-specific (vascular co

46 tment reduced the relative kidney weight and common bile duct dilation and downregulated renal expres

47 rarenal defects in this murine model include common bile duct dilation, intrahepatic biliary duct cys

48 ncluding pancreatic cysts, splenomegaly, and common bile duct dilation.

49 RNA sequencing of NOD.Abd3 common bile duct early in disease demonstrates upregulat

50 Donor common bile duct excised at implantation showed preserva

51 rocedures, including splenectomy (0.7% MIS), common bile duct exploration (24.9% MIS), gastrostomy (2

52 Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) deals with gallston

53 Cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration for biliary stone disease a

54 ic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC) vs laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecyst

55 ake the place of invasive surgery, including common bile duct exploration, thereby decreasing the pat

56 e Cox multivariate regression analysis, only common bile duct frozen section biopsy specimen showing

57 f bile duct proliferation by ligation of the common bile duct had no effect on the expression of thes

58 ERCP showed stricture of distal common bile duct in 12 patients, irregular narrowing of

59 Obstruction of the common bile duct in a variety of clinical settings leads

60 Ligation of the common bile duct in mice provides an excellent model in

61 lock fibrogenesis induced by ligation of the common bile duct in rats.

62 The management of stones in the common bile duct in the laparoscopic era is controversia

63 c cholecystectomy, the rate of injury to the common bile duct increased to 0.5%, and injuries were mo

64 pic cholecystectomy appears to have a higher common bile duct injury rate and a lower mortality rate.

65 Except for a higher common bile duct injury rate, laparoscopic cholecystecto

66 Common bile duct injury was defined by a second surgical

67 Common bile duct injury was found in 2380 (0.39%) of 613

68 e of the neonate in which the hepatic and/or common bile duct is obliterated or interrupted.

69 The cystic-common bile duct junction was visualized before Calot tr

70 aphy (ERCP), laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LECBD), or postoperative ERCP.

71 he findings in Bsep KO mice were compared to common bile duct-ligated (BDL) and multidrug resistance

72 m isolated hepatocytes of livers of sham and common bile duct-ligated (CBDL) animals showed a signifi

73 lestasis, male Sprague-Dawley rats underwent common bile duct ligation (BDL) for 14 days and were tre

74 Common bile duct ligation (BDL) is a well-established mu

75 ow that the cholestatic phenotype induced by common bile duct ligation (BDL) is reduced in mice genet

76 Common bile duct ligation (BDL) or feeding of a novel bi

77 In this study, Spraque-Dawley rats received common bile duct ligation (BDL) to induce cirrhosis.

78 rocholate cotransporting polypeptide (Ntcp), common bile duct ligation (BDL) was performed in pregnan

79 d the role of SHP in liver damage induced by common bile duct ligation (BDL).

80 nscription were assessed in rat livers after common bile duct ligation (CBDL) from 1-7 days, and taur

81 Three-day common bile duct ligation (CBDL) induced renal tubular e

82 In the common bile duct ligation (CBDL) model, endothelin-1 (ET

83 effects of endotoxin, ethinylestradiol, and common bile duct ligation (CBDL) on Mrp2 protein, messen

84 To address this issue, common bile duct ligation (CBDL) was performed in wild-t

85 Cirrhosis was induced in rats by common bile duct ligation (CBDL), and they were compared

86 In a rat model of HPS induced by common bile duct ligation (CBDL), but not thioacetamide

87 microRNA (miRNA) screen of mouse liver after common bile duct ligation (CBDL), we found that miR-199a

88 idneys from rats with cirrhosis secondary to common bile duct ligation (CBDL).

89 imental hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS) after common bile duct ligation (CBDL).

90 imental hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS) after common bile duct ligation (CBDL).

91 ein ligation; and 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-week common bile duct ligation animals by Northern, Western a

92 yme inhibition with tin protoporphyrin IX in common bile duct ligation animals was used to define eff

93 ntravascular monocytes/macrophages in 3-week common bile duct ligation animals, whereas pulmonary mic

94 and regulation of hepatic endothelin 1 after common bile duct ligation are not fully characterized.

95 ycoprotein levels increased severalfold with common bile duct ligation but were unchanged with either

96 experimental hepatopulmonary syndrome after common bile duct ligation by stimulating pulmonary endot

97 led that mice fed bile acids or subjected to common bile duct ligation develop hypercortisolemia.

98 Cholestasis was obtained by common bile duct ligation in mice.

99 isolated from liver and kidney 14 days after common bile duct ligation in rats and assessed by RNA pr

100 ces of hepatic endothelin 1 production after common bile duct ligation in relation to thioacetamide c

101 Common bile duct ligation in the rat is a model of the h

102 Following common bile duct ligation or left hepatic bile duct liga

103 sma endothelin 1 levels were evaluated after common bile duct ligation or thioacetamide administratio

104 reased progressively from 3 to 5 weeks after common bile duct ligation relative to controls (5-week p

105 hosis and portal hypertension due to chronic common bile duct ligation reproduce the features of huma

106 Sprague-Dawley rats underwent common bile duct ligation to establish an OJ model. Orga

107 Male Sprague-dawley rats with common bile duct ligation were killed after 48 and 72 ho

108 models of portal hypertension were employed: common bile duct ligation with cirrhosis and long-term p

109 evelopment of hepatopulmonary syndrome after common bile duct ligation, but not in thioacetamide-indu

110 The effects of common bile duct ligation, endotoxin, and ethinylestradi

111 After common bile duct ligation, serum bile salts initially ro

112 Spraque-Dawley rats with common bile duct ligation-induced cirrhosis or sham oper

113 rats with chronic liver failure secondary to common bile duct ligation.

114 mRNA levels, similar to that observed in rat common bile duct ligation.

115 s in a rat model of cholestasis secondary to common bile duct ligation.

116 also induced cholestasis in mouse livers via common bile duct ligation.

117 epatopulmonary syndrome developed only after common bile duct ligation.

118 noxide production have also been found after common bile duct ligation.

119 This study examined rats 1 to 3 wk after common bile-duct ligation (CBDL), at which time they had

120 phology, triangular cord sign, presence of a common bile duct, liver size and echotexture, splenic ap

121 ulla (n = 24), duodenum (n = 10), and distal common bile duct (n = 3) accounting for the remainder.

122 duct changes (15 of 15 patients), and distal common bile duct narrowing (12 of 15 patients) to either

123 angiocytes undergo adaptive regulation after common bile duct obstruction in the rat.

124 ECBD is as effective as ERCP in clearing the common bile duct of stones.

125 I vs type I; HR: 2.03, P = 0.030), nonpatent common bile duct (Ohi subtype: b, c, and d vs a; HR: 4.3

126 patients had either open exploration of the common bile duct or postoperative ERCP.

127 decreased with increasing distance from the common bile duct (P-trend < 0.001).

128 6% (24/25) In our cohort localization in the common bile duct (P=0.03; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96) was found a

129 ganoids were derived from human gallbladder, common bile duct, pancreatic duct, and IHBDs using cultu

130 ental cholestasis induced by ligation of the common bile duct results in morphological and functional

131 For reader 1, distal common bile duct scores were significantly higher with B

132 pearance, (d) pericholecystic fluid, and (e) common bile duct size and/or choledocholithiasis.

133 and/or stones (P =.003, odds ratio = 1.647), common bile duct status (P =.02, odds ratio = 2.214), an

134 ed with chronic pancreatitis who have distal common bile duct stenoses (64 patients), and 3) those wi

135 Featured statements assert common bile duct stenosis does not require invasive trea

136 olled radial expansion balloons according to common bile duct stone size.

137 ystitis in acute cholecystitis patients with common bile duct stone whose cholecystectomy was deferre

138 cystitis patients with a high probability of common bile duct stone, who were surgical candidates but

139 atients (>=18 years) with native papilla and common bile duct stones (<=1.5 cm in size and <2 cm in d

140 laparoscopic (10) approach, or endoscopy for common bile duct stones (2).

141 e in the conventional surgical management of common bile duct stones (CBDS).

142 RCP) exam; even prior images had evidence of common bile duct stones (CBDS).

143 The optimal strategy for common bile duct stones (CBDSs) encountered during chole

144 tic algorithm for the treatment of difficult common bile duct stones (DCBDS).

145 ed events (HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.05-6.04), and common bile duct stones (HR, 11.83; 95% CI, 1.54-91).

146 Common bile duct stones are a very frequent problem in t

147 ions, and presence of acute cholecystitis or common bile duct stones are associated with difficult ch

148 Common bile duct stones are unusual in children, occurri

149 ent triage resulted in the identification of common bile duct stones during preoperative ERCP in 92.3

150 Unenhanced helical CT depicted common bile duct stones in 15 of 17 patients found to ha

151 ncreatography in the evaluation of suspected common bile duct stones is discussed.

152 pite its common use, endoscopic clearance of common bile duct stones is not always trivial especially

153 Unsuspected common bile duct stones occurred in six patients (1.4%).

154 asis (ie, biliary pancreatitis, cholangitis, common bile duct stones or cholecystitis).

155 concentrated on the management of difficult common bile duct stones using electrohydraulic lithotrip

156 Dec 1, 2017, 3721 consecutive patients with common bile duct stones were recruited, 1718 of whom wer

157 asis, ie, biliary pancreatitis, cholangitis, common bile duct stones, or cholecystitis.

158 , and an accuracy of 94% in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

159 e in the conventional surgical management of common bile duct stones.

160 upport can optimize the outcomes of managing common bile duct stones.

161 the optimum dilation time for the removal of common bile duct stones.

162 tomy and balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones.

163 incterotomy is the established treatment for common bile duct stones.

164 p 1 patients underwent ERCP and clearance of common bile duct stones; group 2 patients underwent MRC;

165 At follow-up, CT abnormalities and common bile duct strictures resolved after steroid thera

166 velops extrahepatic choledochal cysts in the common bile duct, suggesting that this gene regulates di

167 nto the duodenum through the cystic duct and common bile duct system.

168 Modality of evaluation of the common bile duct to rule out concomitant choledocholithi

169 failed, the procedure was repeated until the common bile duct was cleared of stones or an endoprosthe

170 sulated dichloromethylene diphosphonate, the common bile duct was ligated and divided; sham-operated

171 In our literature review, the common bile duct was most commonly involved (56%).

172 In swine, anesthesia was induced and the common bile duct was surgically cannulated with a pediat

173 reatic duct-common bile duct and cystic duct-common bile duct were calculated.

174 opancreatoscopic views of the pancreatic and common bile ducts were generated in 16 patients by using

175 xpressed in the human gallbladder and in the common bile duct, with only minor expression observed in