ライフサイエンスコーパス: euglycemic clamp

1 utilization (determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps).

2 disposal rate (measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps).

3 nd increased rate of glucose disposal during euglycemic clamp.

4 sensitivity measured by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

5 5-h basal period and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

6 3-h basal period and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

7 ween a baseline study and a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp.

8 uscles at the baseline of a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

9 ady-state conditions with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp.

10 y [(18)F]FDG-PET/MRI during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

11 esistance was assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

12 metabolism was evaluated by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

13 f glucose infusion during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

14 rameters were determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

15 -deoxyglucose uptake during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

16 c glucose production during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

17 that of the WT mice in the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

18 levels (near basal, 4x, or 16x) during a 5-h euglycemic clamp.

19 Insulin sensitivity was determined by euglycemic clamp.

20 sal (M) measured during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

21 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

22 sensitivity was measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

23 a traditional (i.e., 2-3 h) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

24 ivity (M/I) was assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

25 tput than controls during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

26 glucose production during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

27 y glucose disposal during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

28 Indians who had undergone a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

29 1.5 mU x kg(-1) x min (-1)) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

30 lucose utilization during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

31 viduals before and during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

32 rnight fast and after a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

33 system was performed under hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

34 ose uptake as measured by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

35 ric characteristics and were studied using a euglycemic clamp.

36 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

37 tivity was measured using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

38 at baseline and during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

39 lue) was determined using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

40 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

41 ucose production during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

42 and 6 weeks as measured by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamps.

43 insulin tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

44 e tolerance test and during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

45 sensitivity was analyzed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

46 K)-DGAT1 transgenic mice by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

47 s and glycogenolysis during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

48 Insulin sensitivity was measured using euglycemic clamps.

49 ucose disposal rates during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

50 glucose tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

51 mic clamps on day 2, and 3) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

52 as assessed with the use of hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

53 nd in wild-type mice during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping.

54 istration of tracers during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping.

55 ers before and during a 2-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (1 mU x kg(-1) x min(-1)).

56 infusion (3 h), insulin was increased with a euglycemic clamp (3 mU x min(-1) x kg(-1)), and hindlimb

57 we infused either saline (n = 6) or insulin (euglycemic clamp, 3.0 mU x min(-1) x kg(-1), n = 9) into

58 s measured by a three-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (4, 8, and 40 mU/m(2)/min) in 87 subjec

59 yperinsulinemic- (9 pmol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) euglycemic clamps (5.1 mmol/l), hypoglycemic clamps (2.9

60 /- 9.7 mg/dl) than during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (95.3 +/- 3.3 mg/dl), indicating mobili

61 ma Indians (P = 0.027) or a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp among 536 nondiabetic Native Americans

62 (18)F-FDG microPET and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analyses demonstrated increased glucose

63 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis 8 weeks after lesioning showed

64 emale mice were assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis and indirect calorimetry and b

65 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis demonstrated that glucose upta

66 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis showed that Adipo(-/-) and Adi

67 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis showed that WY14,643 treatment

68 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis was used to analyze the role o

69 ld-type mice as assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis, consistent with a twofold inc

70 n type 1 diabetes using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and (31)P-MRS before, during, and after

71 tivity was assessed using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and 2-deoxyglucose uptake.

72 ion were evaluated by a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a 2-h hyperglycemic clamp.

73 tion are not clear.METHODSA hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a 3-hour oral glucose tolerance tes

74 ubjects were administered a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp and a control saline infusion.

75 Assessments by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a glucose tolerance test revealed n

76 ured GDR, fasting glucose, and FFAs during a euglycemic clamp and adipose tissue mass and distributio

77 d of each dietary period, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and an intravenous glucose tolerance te

78 sensitivity was measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and ATP production in mitochondria isol

79 ntain euglycemia during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and could entirely be attributed to inc

80 sensitivity was measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and insulin secretion by applying mathe

81 and glucose tolerance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and intravenous and oral glucose tolera

82 d insulin sensitivity using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and muscle insulin receptor substrate a

83 A hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp and sham insulin clamp each of 270 min

84 were insulin sensitivity by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and skeletal muscle mitochondrial capac

85 rom liver insulin resistance, as revealed by euglycemic clamps and hepatic insulin signaling determin

86 with markers of insulin resistance in vivo (euglycemic clamps and HOMA of insulin resistance), and t

87 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and insulin tolerance testing showed s

88 with a family history of type 2 diabetes had euglycemic clamps and muscle biopsies before and after a

89 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and signaling studies were performed f

90 t research tests, including hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and vastus lateralis biopsies.

91 glucose tolerance test and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp) and imaging studies (MRI, DEXA, (1)H-N

92 (LPB) under postabsorptive (hypoinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp) and postprandial (hyperinsulinemic hyp

93 ), insulin sensitivity (via hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps), and insulin secretion [via intraveno

94 tivity were assessed with a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, and insulin signaling and mitochondria

95 ty was analyzed by a 2-step hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp, and postprandial interorgan crosstalk

96 nsitivity was measured by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, and skeletal muscle mitochondrial ATP

97 sensitivity, as measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, and skeletal muscle mitochondrial func

98 nd insulin tolerance tests, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, and insulin signaling studies.

99 in conscious rats during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp as well as in adipocytes isolated from

100 I(clamp)) was studied using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp at baseline and at 4 months.

101 on tomography (PET) imaging performed during euglycemic clamps at moderate hyperinsulinemia (40 mU x

102 nthropometric measures, FFAs, IR measured by euglycemic clamp, blood pressure, fasting serum lipids,

103 on insulin sensitivity (by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp), body composition (by dual-energy X-ra

104 h a 40-mU x m(-2) x min(-1) hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp combined with a [6,6-(2)H(2)]-glucose i

105 nsitivity was measured by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp combined with isotope dilution.

106 ty were assessed using the hyperinsulinemic- euglycemic clamp combined with the glucose tracer techni

107 e treatment, mice underwent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps combined with radiolabeled glucose to

108 l center dot min(-1) center dot kg(-1) under euglycemic clamp conditions in anesthetized dogs.

109 hly insulin sensitive under hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp conditions, eliminating insulin insensi

110 ogs during constant intravenous infusion and euglycemic clamp conditions.

111 randial (hyperinsulinemic hyperaminoacidemic-euglycemic clamp) conditions.

112 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps confirmed enhanced insulin sensitivity

113 s glucose production during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, consistent with induction of hepatic i

114 n action as assessed during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps did not differ between WT and PKC-thet

115 erol, in combination with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp during the last 3 hrs.

116 The hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiment showed that the TRPV1 KO mic

117 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiments show, for the first time, t

118 Yet in insulin tolerance tests and euglycemic clamp experiments, NTE-1 did not enhance insu

119 nsulin tolerance tests, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiments.

120 n sensitivity evaluated via hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, free fatty acids (FFAs) and FFA suppre

121 in infusion during low dose hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp further lowered the glucose production

122 < 0.05) and negatively with hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp glucose infusion rate (r = -0.28, P < 0

123 (IS; n = 10), determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (>30% greater in IS compared with IR, P

124 ions and then during either hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (HE) (n = 10; 40 +/- 9 years, 8 female

125 maging system combined with hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp (HEC) was used.

126 tients underwent a two-step hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (HEC) with glucose tracer and labeled g

127 meal tolerance test (MMT), hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps (HECs), and skeletal muscle and white

128 ance gene, we performed the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in a large family-based population of M

129 glucose metabolism during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in Acc2(-/-) and WT control mice fed a

130 abolism, as assessed during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in awake mice.

131 a hyperinsulinemic (4 mU x kg(-1) x min(-1))-euglycemic clamp in conscious mice.

132 0 and 120 mU.m(-2).min(-1)) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in nine type 2 diabetic subjects.

133 glucose metabolism during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in Pref-1 transgenic and wild-type cont

134 signaling and action during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in awake A-ZIP/F-1 (fatless), fat-tran

135 e metabolism in vivo during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in awake mice.

136 tivity was determined using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in conscious mice.

137 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in DIO mice revealed that MTZ increase

138 tolerance tests (GTTs) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in mouse models of type 2 diabetes.

139 to insulin resistance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in three participant groups (n = 10/gr

140 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in ZFF showed that troglitazone and AG

141 nfusion of insulin during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp induced conspicuous ER stress in the 3-

142 A hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp (insulin 112+/-9 microU/mL) resulted in

143 mice demonstrate, using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, insulin insensitivity in muscle, liver

144 ol at baseline and during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp), lipid oxidation (indirect calorimetry

145 on in isolated hepatocytes, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, liver triglyceride content, and liver

146 rin-infusion (high FFA) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping (low FFA) in a randomized crossover-

147 olic phenotyping, including hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, musc

148 ensitivity, measured by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp method.

149 During hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp of diabetic KKA(Y) mice, A(2B)R antagon

150 ion in IR was studied using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps on integrin alpha(2)beta(1)-null (itga

151 ect measures of insulin sensitivity, such as euglycemic clamp or insulin suppression test, in 2,764 E

152 ted for 5 h and underwent a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp or saline infusion for 120 min.

153 infusion of insulin (3 mU. min(-1). kg(-1), euglycemic clamp) or saline in rat skeletal muscle in vi

154 legs before and after a 3-h hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp performed 3 h after a 45-min, one-legge

155 he following: 1) two 90-min hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps plus naloxone infusion (control); 2) t

156 sal conditions and during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure (HECP), with and without conc

157 vity was assessed using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure in conjunction with glucose t

158 was evaluated by using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure in conjunction with stable is

159 A two-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure in conjunction with stable is

160 led tracer infusion and the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure were used to assess skeletal

161 hr308) in 22 women during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure with and without concomitant

162 in glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure).

163 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure, in conjunction with glucose

164 was determined by using the hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp procedure.

165 studies in the setting of a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp protocol revealed that chronically hype

166 a hyperinsulinemic (40 mU x m(-2) x min(-1))-euglycemic clamp (r = 0.63, P = 0.01), indicating that i

167 = 64] or insulin-resistant [IR] [n = 79] by euglycemic clamp) received four mixed meals over 14 h wi

168 y insulin resistance during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp resulting from >41% reductions in skele

169 ene expression analyses and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp results suggest that CAR activation ame

170 During the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, retrodialysis of dexamethasone into th

171 The hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp revealed that hepatic insulin sensitivi

172 The hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp revealed that VDR activation greatly in

173 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps revealed no differences in insulin sen

174 of insulin resistance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps revealed no significant differences in

175 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp reveals an increased glucose infusion r

176 Subsequent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps showed that ET-1 treatment led to an a

177 s confirmed with the use of hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamping, showing a glucose infusion rate amo

178 vity was determined using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (SIClamp, insulin rate:120 mU/m2/min).

179 Hyperglycemic-euglycemic clamp studies and glucose tolerance testing r

180 scle insulin sensitivity by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies and muscle energetics by using

181 learance were quantified by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies and pyruvate tolerance tests.

182 c insulin sensitivity using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies before and after surgery and co

183 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies demonstrated that targeted disr

184 yruvate tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies established increased insulin s

185 We performed hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies in combination with infusions o

186 se signaling factors during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies in nondiabetic subjects, subjec

187 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies in PPARKI mice revealed insulin

188 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies indicate altered hepatic glucos

189 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies indicate that in contrast to he

190 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies indicated that WY14,643 treatme

191 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies reveal that the maintenance of

192 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed a dramatically improve

193 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed greater high-fat diet-

194 However, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies revealed improved insulin sensi

195 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed significantly improved

196 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that disruption of Grb

197 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that Grp78 heterozygos

198 sis on a high-fat diet, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that insulin sensitivi

199 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that the inbred Cc1(-/

200 Furthermore, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that whole body glucos

201 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies show that BAM15 improves insuli

202 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies showed a 75% decrease in glucos

203 Furthermore, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies showed no difference between Pr

204 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies showed that adiponectin adminis

205 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies showed that LID mice exhibit se

206 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies showed that the increase in hep

207 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies suggest that DM199 increases wh

208 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies were performed at age 8 weeks,

209 insulin tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies were performed with heterozygou

210 harvested before and after hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, at baseline and after 3-month

211 ncluding insulin tolerance, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, insulin secretion in response

212 In hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, Pctp(-/-) mice exhibited profo

213 insulin sensitivity during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, which was associated with incr

214 ic subjects was assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

215 insulin sensitivity during hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies.

216 sitivity were determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

217 and glucose levels through hyperinsulinemic, euglycemic clamp studies.

218 abolism was investigated by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

219 insulinemic-hypoglycemic or hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

220 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping studies revealed that ECSHIP2(Delta/

221 on day 15, and S(I) was measured by using a euglycemic clamp study (40 mU . m(-2) . min(-1)) on day

222 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp study revealed a more than twofold incr

223 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp study was performed to assess the abili

224 high exogenous insulin over the course of a euglycemic clamp study, indicating that hypoinsulinemia

225 of insulin sensitivity (3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp), substrate oxidation (indirect calorim

226 In addition, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp suggests that intracerebroventricular d

227 When studied by the euglycemic clamp technique 129Sv/Hfe(-/-) mice exhibit a

228 nsitivity measured with the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique and with plasma tumor necrosi

229 Using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique, the in vivo insulin-stimulat

230 Using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique, we determined that insulin s

231 t was assessed by using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique.

232 tance was determined by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique.

233 n with isotope dilution and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp techniques.

234 ng indirect calorimetry and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp techniques.

235 RIA), receptor binding, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp techniques.

236 reased more than 30% in the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp test.

237 n sensitive, as measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, than C57BL/6 wild-type mice.

238 ous glucose tolerance test (four cohorts) or euglycemic clamp (three cohorts), and random-effects mod

239 h hyperinsulinemic (40 mU x m(-2) x min(-1))-euglycemic clamp to calculate insulin sensitivity and in

240 We used the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp to determine sites where insulin action

241 t we believe to be a novel hyperglucagonemic-euglycemic clamp to isolate an increment in glucagon lev

242 espite increased use of the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp to study insulin action in mice, the ef

243 glucose tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps to assess the role of the central GLP-

244 We used hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps to show a bona fide circadian rhythm o

245 During hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, transport parameters and distribution

246 sis, we performed high-dose hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps using [3-(3)H]-glucose in liver-specif

247 to assess IMCL content and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps using [6,6-(2)H(2)] glucose to assess

248 ithout insulin stimulation (hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp) using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose scanning

249 emia, hyperlipidemia, and a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp) using positron emission tomography.

250 ontrols (n = 6) underwent a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, VO2max test, dual-energy X-ray absorpt

251 was administered and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was commenced ("fed" period).

252 cose infusion rate during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was increased by 50% in high-fat diet-f

253 Insulin sensitivity during euglycemic clamp was increased, whereas total body fat m

254 Wistar rats assessed by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was minimally affected by pioglitazone

255 During the last 2 h, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was performed.

256 A hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp was used to compare tissue-specific cha

257 sing direct measures (i.e., hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps), we examined the relationships betwee

258 Using the hyperglycemic and euglycemic clamp, we demonstrated impaired beta-cell fun

259 Using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, we determined the effect of HNP-1 on

260 Using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, we studied insulin action in Liv-DGAT

261 and insulin sensitivity by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were examined.

262 At the end of the study, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were performed and skeletal muscle (va

263 Euglycemic clamps were performed in all studies.

264 Euglycemic clamps were performed in dogs under inhalant

265 Basal insulin (0.2 mU x min(-1) x kg(-1)) euglycemic clamps were performed on fat-fed animals (n =

266 e-tolerance test (OGTT) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were performed to assess beta-cell fun

267 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were performed to characterize the cha

268 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamps were performed to determine whole-body

269 -ribofuranoside (AICAR; 8 mg.kg(-1).min(-1))-euglycemic clamps were performed to elicit an increase i

270 treatment, oral glucose tolerance tests and euglycemic clamps were performed, and histochemical anal

271 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were used to assess insulin sensitivit

272 ethionine restriction (MR), hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were used to examine the effect of the

273 er and insulin sensitivity (hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp) were performed before and after the tr

274 in resistance assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, which could mostly be attributed to in

275 stance was confirmed by the hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp, which showed attenuated inhibition of

276 g glucose disposal during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, while decreasing hepatic glucose produ

277 ensitivity (measured with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with [6,6-(2)H(2)]-glucose), and oral g

278 nsitivity was assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with [6,6-(2)H2]-glucose infusion.

279 insulin sensitivity using a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with a glucose isotope tracer before an

280 perinsulinemia induced by a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with administered glucose in similar am

281 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with femoral arteriovenous balance and

282 Twenty baboons received a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with skeletal muscle and visceral adipo

283 hed Cs underwent a two-step hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with skeletal muscle biopsies and indir

284 nsitivity (assessed using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with stable isotope tracer infusion) in

285 tep (10 and 20 mU/m(2)/min) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with stable isotopes, in 6-week postpar

286 raded glucose infusion, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with stable-isotope-labeled tracer infu

287 polygenic obesity underwent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping with concomitant adipose tissue (AT)

288 udies comparing fasting and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping with tracer infusions.

289 insulin administration and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with [(3)H]glucose infusion.

290 ed-meal tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with [6,6-(2)H2]glucose to assess gluc

291 mol/l), hypoglycemic clamps (2.9 mmol/l), or euglycemic clamps with a physiologic low-dose intravenou

292 First, we performed hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with concurrent hippocampal microdialy

293 wenty-one men underwent two hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with d-[6,6-(2)H2]glucose infusion to

294 on (control); 2) two 90-min hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with exercise at 60% Vo(2max), plus na

295 We performed hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with indirect calorimetry and vastus l

296 mic-hypoglycemic and paired hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with infusion of 6,6-(2)H2-glucose and

297 ctroscopy before and during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with isotope dilution.

298 Patients underwent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with simultaneous adipose microdialysi

299 Conscious dogs underwent euglycemic clamps with tracer and hepatic balance measur

300 (1.5 mU . kg(-1) . min(-1)) hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, with an infusion of [6,6-(2)H(2)]gluco