ライフサイエンスコーパス: hyperemic

1 nchanged from the baseline period during the hyperemic and control periods.

2 The purpose of this study was to compare the hyperemic and hemodynamic responses of intracoronary nit

3 Invasive hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure indices are used to

4 rcutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure ratios is useful to

5 finding (57.1%), while 83.7% of patients had hyperemic antral mucosa.

6 Basal average peak velocity (bAPV), hyperemic APV (hAPV), diastolic/systolic velocity ratio

7 y was significant for multiple ulcerated and hyperemic areas with pseudopolyps all throughout the rig

8 using a Doppler wire to measure resting and hyperemic average peak velocities in the left anterior d

9 Peak hyperemic BABF was not altered by dobutamine infusion co

10 ascular function, we determined the reactive hyperemic blood flow (RHBF) responses to 10 minutes of f

11 In addition, we measured rest and hyperemic blood flow in eight normotensive controls.

12 nt ratio led to substantially underestimated hyperemic blood flow measurements.

13 d greater brachial diameters and resting and hyperemic blood flow, marginally increased endothelial f

14 The abnormal hyperemic blood flows and flow reserve suggest an impair

15 However, hyperemic blood flows were significantly lower in the pa

16 ss the association of macrovascular reactive hyperemic blood inflow within the conduit arteries, skel

17 ncluding mild brain lesions with gliosis and hyperemic blood vessels, neuromuscular dysfunctions, anh

18 Resting and peak hyperemic brachial artery blood flow and diameter (BABF

19 nd and coronary flow measurements (basal and hyperemic by Doppler flow wire).

20 ak oxygen consumption [Vo2]) on peak Vo2 and hyperemic calf blood flow in patients with severe conges

21 ac output, arterio-venous oxygen difference, hyperemic calf blood flow, and skeletal muscle fiber mor

22 Peak exercise cardiac output, hyperemic calf blood flow, and vascular conductance were

23 Hyperemic CBF was less in AS compared with controls (2,1

24 pillary resistance to rise, which attenuates hyperemic CBF.

25 If each hyperemic component (BOLD, CBV, CBF) is demonstrated to

26 Specific to each hyperemic component, a universal transfer function (with

27 om linear to nonlinear, associations between hyperemic components and neural activity were linear.

28 Hyperemic components were investigated at 11.7 T in alph

29 stenosis resistance (SR) during baseline and hyperemic conditions as well as fractional flow reserve

30 y microvascular resistances during basal and hyperemic conditions.

31 esting (2.8+/-1.2 versus 1.3+/-0.4s(-1)) and hyperemic coronary blood flow (4.8+/-1.5 versus 2.1+/-0.

32 ed resting coronary blood flow and preserved hyperemic coronary blood flow.

33 aline infusion induced a significantly lower hyperemic coronary flow (140 versus 191 mL/min; P=0.0165

34 nd, 30 mL/min of saline infusion resulted in hyperemic coronary flow (196 versus 192 mL/min; P=0.8292

35 is translated into a linear decrease in mean hyperemic coronary flow (no stenosis: 170.5 +/- 66.8 mL/

36 odeling now permit determination of rest and hyperemic coronary flow and pressure from CTA scans, wit

37 trongly associated with post-PCI increase in hyperemic coronary flow velocity.

38 Hyperemic coronary flow was 40.7% with 5 mL/min, 40.8% w

39 Hg x s; P = .005) and the primary end point hyperemic coronary resistance (mean [IQR], sham: 31 [23-

40 mass (LVM), and PET to quantify resting and hyperemic (dipyridamole 0.56 mg/kg) MBF and CVR in both

41 red with sham, both P < .001), a decrease in hyperemic distal coronary pressure (median [IQR], sham:

42 circulatory resistance (IMR), defined as the hyperemic distal pressure multiplied by the hyperemic me

43 However, the coronary hyperemic dose responses and systemic hemodynamic effect

44 t relationship existed between the change in hyperemic DPT (1.0+/-4.7 s/min [range, 6.8 to 9.6]) and

45 nance imaging and dichotomously defined by a hyperemic endo-epicardial gradient <1.0.

46 Hyperemic enhancement of rCBF and vasodilation throughou

47 Hyperemic FFR flow was similar to baseline iFR flow in f

48 deflation to baseline pulse amplitude in the hyperemic finger divided by the same ratio in the contra

49 Brachial artery diameter responses to hyperemic flow (endothelium dependent), and glyceryltrin

50 aortic stiffness was associated with reduced hyperemic flow (P<0.001).

51 Peak hyperemic flow (PHF) and time-to-peak (TTP) were compute

52 Although peak hyperemic flow exceeded the prestenotic value, resting f

53 Post-treatment hyperemic flow in the patients treated with lisinopril w

54 Brachial hyperemic shear rate and hyperemic flow normalized as a function of baseline radi

55 n contrast, femoral hyperemic shear rate and hyperemic flow normalized to baseline radius were lower

56 Ascorbic acid had no effect on hyperemic flow or arterial dilation to sublingual nitrog

57 Hyperemic flow ratio is derived from an automatic resist

58 (5.6+/-1.6 cm/s) and significantly less than hyperemic flow velocity (21.2+/-3 cm/s; P<0.01).

59 al artery flow-mediated dilation (n=1446) or hyperemic flow velocity (n=1043).

60 We quantified the change in resting and hyperemic flow velocity after PCI in stenoses defined ph

61 ree period changes at least 4-fold less than hyperemic flow velocity after PCI.

62 a curvilinear relationship to the change in hyperemic flow velocity but was flat for resting flow ve

63 locity over the resting wave-free period and hyperemic flow velocity did not differ statistically.

64 In these patients (n=20), hyperemic flow velocity increased significantly from 46.

65 Hyperemic flow velocity increases 6-fold more when steno

66 Pre-PCI, hyperemic flow velocity is diminished in stenoses classe

67 The greatest increase in hyperemic flow velocity was observed when treating steno

68 In patients with AS, hyperemic flow velocity was significantly lower as compa

69 lar resistance and a concomitant increase in hyperemic flow velocity, resulting in immediate improvem

70 =0.002) and either flow-mediated dilation or hyperemic flow velocity.

71 nosis severity was adjusted serially so that hyperemic flow was severely reduced yet always higher th

72 gagement of the coronary ostium might impede hyperemic flow, and therefore impact FFR measurements an

73 nterior descending (LAD) pressure divided by hyperemic flow, measured with an external ultrasonic flo

74 ne infusion when compared with postocclusive hyperemic flow.

75 te artificial ostial stenosis, affecting the hyperemic flow.

76 [-62.6 to -12.6]; P=0.005), mean decrease in hyperemic flow: 306.5 to 272.9 mL/min (difference, -33.5

77 e (resting flow=22+/-5 versus 14+/-4; P<.01; hyperemic flow=59+/-17 versus 39+/-12 mL/min; P<.05).

78 rmal rest myocardial blood flows but reduced hyperemic flows and flow reserve.

79 uman subjects but cannot be used to estimate hyperemic flows due most likely to the strong binding of

80 consumption correlated linearly with maximal hyperemic flows in the left coronary artery territories

81 However, the hyperemic flows were significantly lower in systemic RVs

82 in may prove more suitable for evaluation of hyperemic flows.

83 reducing the area of imaged skin containing hyperemic foci by 49.1%.

84 We show that these persistent early hyperemic foci reliably predict sites of angiogenesis an

85 Hyperemic foci were multifocal and heterogeneously distr

86 o reduce the area of skin that exhibit these hyperemic foci, reducing the area of imaged skin contain

87 treatment developed in sites of preexisting hyperemic foci.

88 We examined hyperemic forearm blood flow, an indicator of microvascu

89 Resting and hyperemic forearm vascular resistance and indices of the

90 were associated with increased baseline and hyperemic FVR (P<0.001).

91 Hyperemic gastric mucosa was the most common stomach fin

92 ng oligemia were seen in 24 cases (96%), and hyperemic halo was seen in 9 cases (36%).

93 We measured Pd/Pa, iFR, FFR, and hyperemic iFR.

94 ssure gradient and significantly inferior to hyperemic iFR.

95 A reactive hyperemic index <=1.35 was defined as ED.

96 ty (-9.9 of 56.6 cm/sec [-17.5%]; P < .001), hyperemic index (-3.9 of 15.1 cm/sec(2) [-25.8%]; P < .0

97 es of endothelial function included reactive hyperemic index (RHI >= 1.67 = normal endothelial functi

98 The reactive hyperemic index (RHI), which measures endothelium-depend

99 locity, time to peak, and acceleration rate (hyperemic index); SvO(2) yielded washout time of oxygen-

100 to assess changes in functional resting and hyperemic indices before and immediately after transcath

101 The rate of disagreement between resting and hyperemic indices remained unchanged, regardless of the

102 Resting and hyperemic intracoronary functional indices are available

103 resistance index, compared with established hyperemic intracoronary hemodynamic parameters, because

104 The hyperemic macroscopic appearance of tumors containing Sd

105 ML score was applied for predicting impaired hyperemic MBF (<=2.30 mL/min per g) from corresponding P

106 By contrast, both hyperemic MBF (+53%, P<0.0001 versus baseline) and CFR (

107 Increase in hyperemic MBF (1.19+/-0.77, 0.94+/-0.65, 1.09+/-0.63, an

108 logical study patients (n=12) showed reduced hyperemic MBF (1.25+/-0.30 versus 1.66+/-0.38 mL.min(-1)

109 owest tertile for delta HR showed a 7% lower hyperemic MBF (1.84 +/- 0.6 ml/min/g vs. 1.98 +/- 0.6 ml

110 istic curve analysis indicated that impaired hyperemic MBF (area under the curve, 0.84; 95% confidenc

111 rior CAD, sex, and age on optimal cutoffs of hyperemic MBF (hMBF) and coronary flow reserve (CFR) and

112 and angiographic characteristics, as well as hyperemic MBF (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.26-0.65;

113 elta MAP also showed a weak correlation with hyperemic MBF (R = 0.04, p = 0.44) and with CVR (R = 0.1

114 Overall, delta HR correlated poorly with hyperemic MBF (R = 0.10, p = 0.06) and with CVR (R = 0.1

115 cified cutoffs were summed stress score >=4, hyperemic MBF 2.00 mL/g per min, and MBF reserve 1.80, r

116 chemia were 2.3 mL.min(-1).g(-1) or less for hyperemic MBF and 2.5 or less for CFR.

117 with either low FFR or low iFR, quantitative hyperemic MBF and CFR values exceeded the ischemic thres

118 After intervention, hyperemic MBF and CFR were unchanged in groups 1, 2, and

119 r ischemic or nonischemic when compared with hyperemic MBF and CFR.

120 significantly higher compared with that for hyperemic MBF and coronary flow reserve (0.76; P=0.32 an

121 In this pilot study, impaired hyperemic MBF and coronary flow reserve were associated

122 Increase in hyperemic MBF and CVR transmurally was directly related

123 e optimal cutoff values were 2.3 and 2.5 for hyperemic MBF and myocardial flow reserve, respectively.

124 Mean values of hyperemic MBF and perfusion reserve, but not resting MBF

125 Moreover, hyperemic MBF and PR were correlated strongly and invers

126 ovement of diagnostic accuracy compared with hyperemic MBF assessment was determined.

127 im of this pilot study was to assess whether hyperemic MBF impairment may be related with VA inducibi

128 ntimal tracking and reentry resulted in less hyperemic MBF improvement compared with other subintimal

129 rdial blood flow (MBF) in a stenotic area to hyperemic MBF in a normal perfused area.

130 Hyperemic MBF in the systemic ventricle was lower in HLH

131 In contrast, hyperemic MBF increased when metoprolol was added to dip

132 The effect of beta 1 receptor blockade on hyperemic MBF is unknown.

133 83%, and 76%, respectively, for quantitative hyperemic MBF PET.

134 in resting MBF together with the increase in hyperemic MBF resulted in a significant increase in the

135 cificity of 57% and 93%, respectively, while hyperemic MBF showed similar sensitivity (61%, P=0.57) b

136 imed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of hyperemic MBF versus coronary flow reserve (CFR).

137 Hyperemic MBF was also significantly lower in subjects w

138 The decrease in hyperemic MBF was associated with a decrease in blood ve

139 In addition, recovery of hyperemic MBF was less pronounced after subintimal cross

140 Results: Hyperemic MBF was lower in the concordant low (2.09 +/-

141 Hyperemic MBF was more accurate than CFR, implying that

142 The diagnostic accuracy of hyperemic MBF was significantly higher than CFR (80% vs.

143 Independent risk factors for a reduced hyperemic MBF were an HLHS subtype with mitral stenosis

144 Both resting and hyperemic MBF were lower in men than in women, even afte

145 MAP (i.e., greatest decline) showed similar hyperemic MBF, and an 8% lower CVR compared with those i

146 Resting myocardial blood flow (MBF), hyperemic MBF, and coronary flow reserve (CFR) were comp

147 raphy was performed to quantify resting MBF, hyperemic MBF, and coronary flow reserve.

148 Recovery of hyperemic MBF, coronary flow reserve, and perfusion defe

149 Changes in hyperemic MBF, coronary flow reserve, and perfusion defe

150 Hyperemic MBF, coronary flow reserve, and RFR were lower

151 chemia, and 195 (33.6%) vessels had impaired hyperemic MBF.

152 cans on the basis of (presumably) sufficient hyperemic MBF.

153 However, hyperemic MBFs in the mid-to-apical LV section were lowe

154 interval [CI], 1.07-1.63; P=0.01) and lower hyperemic mean flow velocity (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.9

155 tic stiffness and CVD events was mediated by hyperemic mean flow velocity.

156 The inverse of the hyperemic mean transit time has been shown to correlate

157 onary pressure divided by the inverse of the hyperemic mean transit time provides an index of microci

158 hyperemic distal pressure multiplied by the hyperemic mean transit time.

159 fined as a coronary flow reserve <2.5 and/or hyperemic microvascular resistance >=2.5.

160 Hyperemic microvascular resistance (expressed in mm Hg.c

161 We investigated whether hyperemic microvascular resistance (HMR) immediately aft

162 TAVI induces an immediate decrease in hyperemic microvascular resistance and a concomitant inc

163 Hyperemic microvascular resistance correlated with late-

164 Hyperemic microvascular resistance decreased from 2.03+/

165 structural endotypes were distinguished by a hyperemic microvascular resistance threshold of 2.5 mm H

166 inistration [iFRa]), FFR, HSR, baseline, and hyperemic microvascular resistance were calculated using

167 (RRR) expresses the ratio between basal and hyperemic microvascular resistance.

168 , whereas mean values were used to calculate hyperemic microvascular resistance.

169 had functional MVD, with normal minimal MR (hyperemic MR<2.5 mmHg/cm/s), and 38% had structural MVD

170 s), and 38% had structural MVD with elevated hyperemic MR.

171 ecting hemodynamically significant CAD using hyperemic myocardial blood flow (hMBF) is complicated by

172 .05 [95% CI, 1.68-5.54]; P<0.001), decreased hyperemic myocardial blood flow (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-

173 emission tomography to quantify resting and hyperemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) and CVR.

174 creasing triglyceride levels (r=0.84), while hyperemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) decreased (r=-0.64

175 low reserve (RFR) is defined as the ratio of hyperemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) in a stenotic area

176 Impaired hyperemic myocardial blood flow (MBF) is associated with

177 capacity (CFC) is a measure that integrates hyperemic myocardial blood flow and coronary flow reserv

178 capacity (CFC) is a measure that integrates hyperemic myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow rese

179 Baseline and follow-up hyperemic myocardial blood flow did not differ (11.8% +/

180 Using model-independent deconvolution, hyperemic myocardial blood flow was evaluated, and ische

181 Hyperemic myocardial blood flow was lower in patients th

182 After revascularization, hyperemic myocardial blood flow was significantly higher

183 raphy-derived resting myocardial blood flow, hyperemic myocardial blood flow, coronary flow reserve,

184 However, RFR does not outperform absolute hyperemic myocardial perfusion for detecting FFR-defined

185 ia PET, and MFR was calculated as a ratio of hyperemic over resting MBF.

186 mass), but there was significant increase in hyperemic peak diastolic velocity (0.71+/-0.26 vs. 1.08+

187 diated dilation was linearly proportional to hyperemic peak systolic WSS (r = 0.79, p = 0.0001).

188 line diameter (r = 0.62, p = 0.006), but the hyperemic peak WSS stimulus was also inversely related t

189 aseline perfusion values under occlusion) in hyperemic perfusion upon removal of occlusion (PEAK/OCC)

190 mpared to simple lesions at both resting and hyperemic physiological states [n = 14, [Formula: see te

191 rteries; 95% CI, -0.2 to 2.1; P=0.116), peak hyperemic popliteal flow (0.0+/-0.4 mL/s; 95% CI, -0.8 t

192 k walking time (PWT), collateral count, peak hyperemic popliteal flow, and capillary perfusion measur

193 e then matures via development of an initial hyperemic (positive BOLD) phase that eventually masks ox

194 Before PCI, the invasive hyperemic pressure-wire pullback was performed to derive

195 gs were obtained prospectively during manual hyperemic pullback in 100 normal and diseased coronary a

196 microcirculatory resistance (IMR), absolute hyperemic resistance (R(Hyp)), and microvascular resista

197 tance was 2.5 +/- 1.0 times higher than mean hyperemic resistance in patients.

198 ng myocardial resistance does not equal mean hyperemic resistance, thereby contravening the most basi

199 ic resting myocardial resistance equals mean hyperemic resistance.

200 antagonists potently reduced the LC-induced hyperemic response (-56%, p < 0.001 or -47%, p < 0.05).

201 is small (approximately 15%) relative to the hyperemic response (approximately 60%), (ii) this energy

202 ic effects and skewed data, we expressed the hyperemic response (called the PAT ratio) as the natural

203 dy was to determine if other pathways to the hyperemic response are present and if these neurons have

204 cellular levels, such that the postprandial hyperemic response can direct up to 30% of systemic bloo

205 A hyperemic response delivers O(2) and nutrients, clears m

206 hemotherapy should be delayed until the peak hyperemic response has subsided.

207 Mucosal damage alone evoked a strong hyperemic response in both control and ablated rats.

208 es an equivalent but more prolonged coronary hyperemic response in normal coronary arteries.

209 l endothelial function by measuring reactive hyperemic response in the finger, was performed in 23 pa

210 This hyperemic response involves a rapid electrical component

211 acid challenge is enhanced by the sustained hyperemic response mediated through sensory afferent neu

212 cause maximal hyperemia as compared with the hyperemic response of complete coronary occlusion in 6 c

213 complete coronary occlusion yielded a better hyperemic response than either drug, indicating that max

214 was produced in dogs to reduce the reactive hyperemic response to <20%.

215 gnificant, dose-dependent attenuation of the hyperemic response to 5 nmol adenosine.

216 ffeine is believed to attenuate the coronary hyperemic response to adenosine by competitive blockade

217 The impaired hyperemic response to ATP persisted in older (20- to 30-

218 ation of digital pulse amplitude and digital hyperemic response to cardiovascular risk factors in the

219 The hyperemic response to dipyridamole and the myocardial fl

220 The normal hyperemic response to dipyridamole in long-term smokers

221 The hyperemic response to dobutamine is in excess of that pr

222 We examined the hyperemic response to elevated luminal PCO(2) in the duo

223 ions that reduce EDNO production disturb the hyperemic response to exercise, resulting in a reduced e

224 o significant difference was observed in the hyperemic response to forearm ischemia.

225 ved significantly greater, though transient, hyperemic response to IC infusion of mannitol compared t

226 ned associations between these exposures and hyperemic response to ischemia and baseline pulse amplit

227 Conclusions: The duodenal hyperemic response to luminal CO(2) is dependent on cyto

228 The hyperemic response to mucosal damage alone is not mediat

229 on size is inversely related to the cerebral hyperemic response to oxotremorine, a muscarinic agonist

230 The total hyperemic response to passive limb movement (leg blood f

231 in these groups by testing the local thermal hyperemic response to saline used as a reference compare

232 improves basal PMBF, and restores the normal hyperemic response to secretion.

233 reduction of the postocclusive peak reactive hyperemic response was also observed in control dogs (16

234 The increase in BAD during peak hyperemic response was greater after infusion of dobutam

235 owever, in animals pretreated with 8PT, this hyperemic response was severely attenuated, primarily by

236 tically involved in mediating the functional hyperemic response within rodent whisker-barrel cortex (

237 damage, SAR247799 improved the microvascular hyperemic response without reducing lymphocyte numbers.

238 nd factor), in skin as the heat-induced skin hyperemic response, and in urine as 24-h albuminuria.

239 Digital hyperemic response, as measured by RH-PAT, is attenuated

240 imuli elicited a significantly prolonged ONH hyperemic response, especially with PhNR-S.

241 sine receptor antagonist 8PT attenuated this hyperemic response, it is concluded that adenosine is in

242 In contrast to the peak hyperemic response, the increase in BAD (%) induced by S

243 ortant components of the cortical functional hyperemic response.

244 ot produce a commensurate attenuation of the hyperemic response.

245 Acid exposure after damage sustained the hyperemic response.

246 ed rats lost gastric protection despite this hyperemic response.

247 er system in the transduction of adenosine's hyperemic response.

248 controls, patients had a blunted and delayed hyperemic response.

249 een the air pollution exposures assessed and hyperemic response.

250 p < 0.05) K+ channels primarily impaired the hyperemic response.

251 n retinal microvessels; as heat-induced skin hyperemic response; and as urinary albumin excretion.

252 Reactive hyperemic responses (a measure of the severity of ischem

253 ere we show in mice and humans that reactive hyperemic responses (i.e., reoxygenation rates following

254 a robust method to quantify flicker-induced hyperemic responses and to study neurovascular coupling

255 on of pyramidal cells evoked COX-2-dependent hyperemic responses in mice.

256 eNMDAR loss of function reduced hyperemic responses in rCBF and plasma flux in individua

257 plasma markers of inflammation, or vascular hyperemic responses to be included in diagnostic algorit

258 aser Doppler imaging, and joint swelling and hyperemic responses to recombinant human beta-tryptase.

259 In urethane anesthetized animals, functional hyperemic responses were obtained both before and after

260 tment, particularly in those with normalized hyperemic responses.

261 onary flow reserve (CFR) of > or =2.5 (CFR = hyperemic/resting blood flow).

262 In controls and patients, MPR (hyperemic/resting perfusion) and Endo/Epi ratio were det

263 ppeared as pale necrotic areas surrounded by hyperemic rims, while chronic lesions demonstrated progr

264 nding eruption, petechiae on the palate, and hyperemic sclerae in a 44-year-old man returning from Pu

265 Brachial hyperemic shear rate and hyperemic flow normalized as a

266 In contrast, femoral hyperemic shear rate and hyperemic flow normalized to ba

267 However, hyperemic SR, combining both pressure and flow velocity

268 ld represent physiological adaptation to the hyperemic state of adiposity in childhood.

269 In this study, we used hyperemic stenosis resistance (HSR), a combined pressure

270 ratio (iFR), fractional flow reserve (FFR), hyperemic stenosis resistance (hSR), and to identify the

271 eement: -0.13 to 0.36), proportional to mean hyperemic stenosis resistance (Spearman rho =0.61; P=0.0

272 The primary end point was the difference in hyperemic stenosis resistance index between measurements

273 Mean hyperemic stenosis resistance was 0.37+/-0.19 Hg/cm/s fo

274 volumetric flow augmentation in response to hyperemic stimuli (i.e., abnormal coronary flow reserve)

275 nitroprusside also appears to be a suitable hyperemic stimulus for coronary physiological measuremen

276 ypercapnia of 10 mm Hg may provide a cardiac hyperemic stimulus similar to adenosine.

277 severity using a coronary pressure wire and hyperemic stimulus.

278 ss of guide wire placement or the need for a hyperemic stimulus.

279 requires a pressure-monitoring guidewire and hyperemic stimulus.

280 s on 11 healthy volunteers at rest and after hyperemic stress with dipyridamole.

281 and rest; inducible ischemia was defined as hyperemic subendocardial:subepicardial perfusion ratio <

282 Thus, we propose that a hyperemic switch can be exploited to visualize the cance

283 In 62 patients with RAS, TPG (resting and hyperemic systolic gradient [HSG], fractional flow reser

284 rved in sickle cell disease, where occlusive hyperemic testing was deemed contraindicated.

285 peared to produce tumors that were much more hyperemic than those formed by appropriate control cells

286 ed as the ratio of adenosine-induced maximal hyperemic to basal average peak velocity.

287 The CFR was calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to baseline coronary blood flow velocity in th

288 reserve (PR) was calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to rest MBF.

289 CFR was the ratio of hyperemic to resting diastolic flow velocity.

290 usion reserve was calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to resting MBF.

291 MPRI was calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to resting myocardial blood flow and subdivide

292 ess apparent deviation, such as the ratio of hyperemic to resting velocity (coronary flow reserve), h

293 etrofosmin is technically feasible, although hyperemic values are significantly lower than from PET w

294 Total hyperemic volume in the recovery period increased by 73%

295 schemia increased by 88% (p = 0.04), whereas hyperemic volume rose by 98% (p = 0.1).

296 observed that human brains reliably generate hyperemic waves after ECT seizure which are highly consi

297 c resonance angiography (PMRCA), we measured hyperemic WSS and FMD in 18 healthy volunteers.

298 rterial FMD is linearly proportional to peak hyperemic WSS in normal subjects.

299 ounted for, at least partially, by a greater hyperemic WSS stimulus in small arteries.

300 F, qualitative measurements plateaued in the hyperemic zones.