ライフサイエンスコーパス: dislodgement

1 ommon complication was left ventricular lead dislodgement.

2 eous ruptured membranes, shunt blockage, and dislodgement.

3 neal flap, potentially reducing risk of flap dislodgement.

4 lure, phlebitis, occlusion/infiltration, and dislodgement.

5 effectiveness of the device to prevent drain dislodgement.

6 ous retinal detachment, cataract, and septum dislodgement.

7 complications in 25 of 725 patients, and no dislodgements.

8 he most common major complications were lead dislodgement (10 events; n=9 patients, 2.8%), postoperat

9 These included accidental dislodgement (4.6%), infection (4.3%), occlusion (3.7%),

10 the following: deep vein thrombosis (4.1%), dislodgement (5.0%), occlusion (3.8%), phlebitis (3.4%),

11 (n = 2,767), phlebitis 12% (n = 1,421), and dislodgement 7% (n = 779) of catheters.

12 Partial dislodgement accounted for most dislodgement events, inc

13 ed analysis of the primary outcome excluding dislodgement also showed the intervention significantly

14 No infectious complications occurred; 1 lead dislodgement and 1 lead fracture required repeated surge

15 in 48 of 166 patients, including prostheses' dislodgement and removed/extruded prostheses.

16 ystem show strong relief of TI and a lack of dislodgement and roadblocking effects, indicative of rap

17 oral aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to dislodgement and subsequent embolization of debris from

18 ught to describe the incidence of acute lead dislodgements and the consequences of these events in pa

19 n, bleeding, phlebitis, catheter leakage and dislodgement) and whether the VAD was removed unexpected

20 Lead dislodgements are common adverse events in patients unde

21 tocol approved on July 25, 2021, we included dislodgement as part of PIVC failure.

22 using protective equipment to prevent sensor dislodgement, as well as further research aiming to: (i)

23 tics, making it either sensitive to frequent dislodgement by elongating RNA polymerases (RNAPs) from

24 , noncuffed CVCs secured with SASS had fewer dislodgements compared with SSDs, with a lower cost per

25 The risk of coronary stent thrombosis from dislodgement due to MRI early after stent placement is n

26 es experienced by a drainage catheter during dislodgement events, and the individual components which

27 Partial dislodgement accounted for most dislodgement events, including 6 partial dislodgements i

28 patients required reoperation to treat lead dislodgement, extracardiac stimulation, or infection dur

29 indings of common complications such as lead dislodgement, fracture, and perforation, emphasizing the

30 degradation of nascent RNA leading to Pol II dislodgement from DNA.

31 ated to changes in MBF and occurs from their dislodgement from microbubble aggregates entrapped in la

32 Acute dislodgements had increased odds for other adverse event

33 Device dislodgement was lower with SASS (8 dislodgements in 153 patients [5.2%]) compared with SSD

34 n 153 patients [5.2%]) compared with SSD (35 dislodgements in 154 patients [22.7%]) (RR, 0.23; 95% CI

35 e no procedure-related complications or lead dislodgements in either group.

36 ost dislodgement events, including 6 partial dislodgements in the SASS group (3.9%) and 30 partial di

37 ents in the SASS group (3.9%) and 30 partial dislodgements in the SSD group (19.5%) (RR, 0.18; 95% CI

38 actors associated with an increased risk for dislodgement included New York Heart Association functio

39 Univariate variables associated with dislodgements included older age, female sex, and patien

40 Catheter dislodgement is a common complication for children with

41 Lead dislodgement (LD) has been one of the most common early

42 ded minor device complications (eg, catheter dislodgement, occlusion, tip migration, infiltration, su

43 Acute lead dislodgements occur more often in patients with more com

44 11 (0.3%) for usual care; nonvascular device dislodgement occurred in 2 (0.04%) vs 7 (0.1%), respecti

45 Acute dislodgement occurred in 2,628 of 226,764 patients.

46 s including infection and lead fractures and dislodgement occurred in 27 patients (12%) but did not i

47 Dislodgement of an intrauterine device was reported in 1

48 ntion (4), transient brachial plexus injury, dislodgement of an intrauterine device, and vaginal gran

49 val in amalgam occurred by microfracture and dislodgement of cracked segments, while wear in the silv

50 es were able to meet the needs of preventing dislodgement of patient drainage catheters.

51 the transcription cycle, which involves the dislodgement of polymerase from DNA, leading to release

52 on membrane and rupture of the cell, (ii) by dislodgement of the cell from the epithelium by PMNs, or

53 The dislodgement of trapped SS RBCs and an increase in wall

54 These drains suffer from a high rate of dislodgement of up to 30% resulting in emergency room vi

55 cacy was defined as the absence of any screw dislodgement or development of a pathologic fracture at

56 no device or left atrial thrombosis, device dislodgement, or a new device leak were observed.

57 etection of lead insulation break, fracture, dislodgement, or other problems.

58 The primary outcome was dislodgement (partial or total), defined as movement of

59 Dislodgement, reported as a risk ratio (RR), was estimat

60 adverse events could be attributed to these dislodgements through a minimum of 12 months of follow-u

61 ions: phlebitis, infiltration/occlusion, and dislodgement to improve patient outcomes.

62 Acute lead dislodgement was defined as movement of the lead requiri

63 Device dislodgement was lower with SASS (8 dislodgements in 153

64 Coronary sinus ostial lead dislodgement was not observed after discharge.

65 ear in amalgam is microfracture and material dislodgement, while that in consolidated silver is ducti

66 drainage and a left ventricular pacing lead dislodgement with no deaths.

67 6.7% of the patients; events included device dislodgement with percutaneous retrieval (in 1.7%), card