ライフサイエンスコーパス: intraabdominal

1 Tumor recurrence tends to be intraabdominal.

2 oportion of patients with pneumonia (27.1%), intraabdominal (19.5%), urinary tract (20.0%), or skin a

3 dent diabetes (8%), pancreatic fistula (5%), intraabdominal abscess (4%), small bowel obstruction (4%

4 12, 3%), wound infections (n = 12, 3%), and intraabdominal abscess (n = 9, 2%).

5 .025), infectious complications (p = 0.014), intraabdominal abscess (p = 0.022), and postoperative de

6 Four complications were observed: 1 intraabdominal abscess and 1 case of urinary retention i

7 eric anastomosis site, graft thrombosis, and intraabdominal abscess formation have been well document

8 more, the trxB mutant was not able to induce intraabdominal abscess formation in a mouse model, where

9 ysaccharides (Zps) confer protection against intraabdominal abscess formation in a T cell-dependent m

10 report that purified CP5 and CP8 facilitated intraabdominal abscess formation in animals when given i

11 o shown when TLR2-/- mice exhibited impaired intraabdominal abscess formation in response to B. fragi

12 tivated T cells modulated the development of intraabdominal abscess formation.

13 rding the mechanism by which T cells control intraabdominal abscess formation.

14 Intraabdominal abscess occurred in 14% (33/240) of patie

15 such as pancreatic fistula, wound infection, intraabdominal abscess, and need for reoperation.

16 in were more likely to develop a significant intraabdominal abscess, collection, or fistula.

17 jor complications, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, or pancreaticojejunal anastomoti

18 ith complications, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, or postoperative death.

19 ajor complication, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, pancreaticojejunal anastomotic l

20 inal COS (12): mortality, bowel obstruction, intraabdominal abscess, recurrent appendicitis, complica

21 ound infection (8%), cholangitis (5.7%), and intraabdominal abscess/biloma (2.9%).

22 T cells are critical for the formation of intraabdominal abscesses by Staphylococcus aureus.

23 ha- or ICAM-1-specific Abs failed to develop intraabdominal abscesses following challenge with purifi

24 eroides fragilis promotes the development of intraabdominal abscesses in experimental models of sepsi

25 the 5.0-kDa molecule, were protected against intraabdominal abscesses induced by challenge with viabl

26 to rats in vivo conferred protection against intraabdominal abscesses induced by viable bacterial cha

27 traumatic injuries more than 4 hours old, or intraabdominal abscesses were enrolled.

28 sure improved, as evaluated by endoscopy and intraabdominal adhesion scoring.

29 tudy were 1) to examine interrelations among intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAAT) and other adiposity

30 Intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAAT) is the body fat dep

31 d with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAAT) was determined with

32 However, the relation between fat intake and intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAAT), a risk factor for

33 try, subcutaneous abdominal tissue (SAT) and intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAF) by computed tomograp

34 luation of the various fat depots, including intraabdominal adipose tissue (IAF), subcutaneous adipos

35 The inverse association between intraabdominal adipose tissue and the postprandial CRP r

36 Endpoint trunk fat mass, total fat mass, and intraabdominal adipose tissue were all lower with MCT co

37 Despite these genetic differences in loss of intraabdominal adipose tissue, improvement in glucose di

38 Intraabdominal adiposity and insulin resistance are risk

39 n transverse and coronal interpretations for intraabdominal anatomic and pathologic findings (kappa=0

40 of disease after resection was predominantly intraabdominal and involved the original tumor site, per

41 - and preadipocyte-containing fractions from intraabdominal and subcutaneous adipose tissue of mice r

42 Intraabdominal and subcutaneous fat depots were two- to

43 Measures of intraabdominal and subcutaneous fat did not predict fast

44 etic resonance imaging to measure accurately intraabdominal and subcutaneous fat masses in 14 obese [

45 n the renal subcapsular space, intrahepatic, intraabdominal, and subcutaneous locations.

46 bactam, and comparators against respiratory, intraabdominal, and urinary isolates of Enterobacterales

47 ients who required anesthesia for one of the intraabdominal aortic, gastric, biliary, or colon operat

48 In addition, intraparenchymal and intraabdominal bleeding did not complicate any PIT; 71%

49 There were two cases of intraabdominal bleeding, one of which required surgical

50 The amount of adipose tissue stored in the intraabdominal cavity is an important, independent risk

51 lative distribution of adipose tissue in the intraabdominal compared with the subcutaneous abdominal

52 he need for laparotomy and the potential for intraabdominal complications have been cited as relative

53 Intraabdominal complications occur in almost 1 in 5 pedi

54 er causes of death were liver graft failure, intraabdominal complications, and malignancy.

55 patients required operative intervention for intraabdominal complications.

56 iring ICU and transitioned to comfort-care), intraabdominal conditions, and alcohol abuse/withdrawal.

57 ene insertional mutation, crsp, causing high intraabdominal cryptorchidism in homozygous males.

58 reat gene in mice causes infertile bilateral intraabdominal cryptorchidism.

59 PV for bloodstream infections was 96.5%, for intraabdominal cultures it was 98.6%, for respiratory cu

60 Massive unilocular intraabdominal cysts in children are rare.

61 nths), none of the 10 recipients experienced intraabdominal desmoid tumor recurrence or developed de

62 gan-based primary site are characteristic of intraabdominal desmoplastic small round cell tumor.

63 g 16 patients, it was used to stage possible intraabdominal disease.

64 procedures, to create an adequate length of intraabdominal esophagus to perform a wrap.

65 The intraabdominal failure pattern appears to be decreased c

66 Intraabdominal fat (IAF) area is often measured indirect

67 an its wild-type littermates, and has excess intraabdominal fat accumulation.

68 ages of change in body weight, fat mass, and intraabdominal fat area were assessed.

69 In obese girls, intraabdominal fat but not BMI or waist-to-hip ratio was

70 Assessments at baseline, 1, and 2 y included intraabdominal fat by computed tomography scan and body

71 Two-year intraabdominal fat changes were 7.05 +/- 5.07% for the t

72 sment of fatness reinforced the concept that intraabdominal fat compartment is strongly correlated wi

73 Fat-free mass as well as intraabdominal fat correlated to a similar extent with L

74 ercentage body fat increases and attenuating intraabdominal fat increases in overweight and obese pre

75 MR imaging percentage of intraabdominal fat measurements (mean, 23%; 95% CI: 17%,

76 astrointestinal perforation, bowel ischemia, intraabdominal fat necrosis, and miscellaneous processes

77 tin, resistin, retinol binding protein-4, or intraabdominal fat volume.

78 ar risk factors are related to the amount of intraabdominal fat.

79 tissue was redistributed, with reduction of intraabdominal fat.

80 njury can be induced by metabolically active intraabdominal fat.

81 o avoid increases in percentage body fat and intraabdominal fat.

82 Subcutaneous- and intraabdominal-fat areas, thigh-muscle area and strength

83 itivity of abdominal radiography was 90% for intraabdominal foreign body and 49% for bowel obstructio

84 vein gas, extensive intraperitoneal gas and intraabdominal free fluid.

85 ally important complications: three cases of intraabdominal hemorrhage and one case each of gross hem

86 The 12th patient had intraabdominal hemorrhage around the spleen and no obvio

87 Gastrointestinal or intraabdominal hemorrhage occurred in approximately 5 pe

88 was associated with clinically insignificant intraabdominal hemorrhage.

89 metry, and subcutaneous abdominal (SAAT) and intraabdominal (IAAT) adipose tissue by computerized tom

90 mon diagnoses were appendicitis (33%), other intraabdominal infection (29%), and abscess (25%).

91 domly assigned 518 patients with complicated intraabdominal infection and adequate source control to

92 The most common causes were intraabdominal infection and graft pancreatitis (38%), p

93 Patients with intraabdominal infection enrolled in PRTs have an increa

94 The successful treatment of intraabdominal infection requires a combination of anato

95 The incidence of intraabdominal infection was slightly higher in the SE g

96 One hundred sixty-eight adults with intraabdominal infection were treated at a single instit

97 ventilator-associated pneumonia, complicated intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract i

98 Surgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death occurred in 56 of 257

99 posite of surgical-site infection, recurrent intraabdominal infection, or death within 30 days after

100 formation in an experimental animal model of intraabdominal infection.

101 or negative for acute appendicitis or other intraabdominal infection.

102 derwent relaparotomy, including two (7%) for intraabdominal infection.

103 HRQoL) measures in patients with complicated intraabdominal infections (cIAIs) commonly associated wi

104 tance among pathogens that cause complicated intraabdominal infections (cIAIs) supports the developme

105 nd microbiological evaluation of complicated intraabdominal infections in adults, children, and pregn

106 Treatment of intraabdominal infections remains a challenge, mainly be

107 The incidence of intraabdominal infections significantly decreased betwee

108 aumatic wound infections, sepsis, burns, and intraabdominal infections were common.

109 In patients with intraabdominal infections who had undergone an adequate

110 clinafloxacin in the treatment of a range of intraabdominal infections, and in patients with a broad

111 s, Infections of the Gastrointestinal Tract, Intraabdominal Infections, Bone and Joint Infections, Ur

112 s, Infections of the Gastrointestinal Tract, Intraabdominal Infections, Bone and Joint Infections, Ur

113 samples are indicated during soft tissue and intraabdominal infections, but cultures obtained through

114 rs were treated for bloodstream, complicated intraabdominal infections, or complicated urinary tract

115 he plethora of microorganisms encountered in intraabdominal infections.

116 s may not be applicable to all patients with intraabdominal infections.

117 as adjuncts in the management of complicated intraabdominal infections.

118 r the treatment of patients with complicated intraabdominal infections.

119 rition because of its importance in fighting intraabdominal infections.

120 every 6 hours in the treatment of a range of intraabdominal infections.

121 adequate surgical management of complicated intraabdominal infections.

122 biotic regimens for the empiric treatment of intraabdominal infections.

123 ith pharmacobehavioral techniques (including intraabdominal injections of active compounds and a comp

124 Patients with intraabdominal injuries were identified retrospectively.

125 Seventy-five (10%) of 744 patients had intraabdominal injuries, and US depicted free fluid in 4

126 e patient with adrenal hematoma had no other intraabdominal injuries.

127 CT findings were no intraabdominal injury (n = 932), solid organ injury only

128 l perforation following BAT without signs of intraabdominal injury on initial imaging and extensive p

129 For detection of intraabdominal injury, US was less sensitive in pregnant

130 aparotomy were commonly utilized to diagnose intraabdominal injury.

131 sonography may identify children at risk for intraabdominal injury.

132 graphy and computed tomography) in detecting intraabdominal injury.

133 e were 328 pregnant patients, 23 of whom had intraabdominal injury.

134 , but moderately sensitive, for detection of intraabdominal injury.

135 Together they determine the intraabdominal, intrathoracic, and subglottic pressure,

136 cations, there no statistical differences in intraabdominal leak, unplanned reoperation, myocardial i

137 and a new PEG was placed in position with no intraabdominal leak.

138 Intraabdominal malignancy was the leading provisional di

139 diac disease, extremity fracture, knee pain, intraabdominal malignancy, and stroke.

140 nts, unresectability is mainly the result of intraabdominal metastases.

141 They are at high risk for intraabdominal metastatic spread.

142 virus from the 2022 outbreak and identified intraabdominal mpox replication associated with endometr

143 tin, resistin, retinol binding protein-4, or intraabdominal obesity, suggesting that these factors do

144 Us and in respiratory tract isolates than in intraabdominal or urinary tract isolates.

145 Because intrathoracic and intraabdominal organs are usually recovered before the k

146 sually recovered after the intrathoracic and intraabdominal organs, careful palpation of the kidneys

147 ity as a means of diagnosing mass lesions in intraabdominal organs.

148 ormation about the heart, vessels, lungs and intraabdominal organs.

149 l findings (n=35) about the intrathoracic or intraabdominal organs.

150 With regard to the presence of intraabdominal pathologic findings, coronal reformations

151 d ventilatory consequences such as increased intraabdominal pressure and hypercarbia.

152 Increased intraabdominal pressure associated with central obesity

153 cally, morbidly obese patients have a higher intraabdominal pressure at 2 to 3 times that of nonobese

154 The increased intraabdominal pressure enhances venous stasis, reduces

155 Hemodynamic insults secondary to increased intraabdominal pressure include increased afterload and

156 probably secondary to a chronic increase in intraabdominal pressure leading to increased intrathorac

157 volume to minimize the effects of increased intraabdominal pressure on renal and cardiac function.

158 insufflation with CO2 and an increase in the intraabdominal pressure up to 15 mm Hg.

159 prone positioning, hemodynamic, respiratory, intraabdominal pressure, and echocardiographic data were

160 pressure over inspired oxygen fraction, the intraabdominal pressure, and the right and left cardiac

161 and avoidance of events leading to increased intraabdominal pressure.

162 increased variceal pressure with increasing intraabdominal pressure.

163 Intrathoracic and intraabdominal pressures were measured with balloon cath

164 Combining extended hepatectomy with another intraabdominal procedure increases the risk of postopera

165 tivariate analysis showed that a synchronous intraabdominal procedure was the only factor associated

166 ion, and 40 patients underwent a synchronous intraabdominal procedure.

167 cipants had undergone one or more additional intraabdominal procedures.

168 specifically influence fat accretion in the intraabdominal region.

169 y polysaccharides in preventing experimental intraabdominal sepsis in the absence of antimicrobial th

170 omplication rates to include reoperation and intraabdominal sepsis were markedly increased in those p

171 ication for LTx, cytomegalovirus status, and intraabdominal sepsis) and donor factors (donor age, col

172 ls migrate into the peritoneal cavity during intraabdominal sepsis, but the trafficking of NKT and T

173 iologic drainage or surgical exploration for intraabdominal sepsis.

174 scess formation associated with experimental intraabdominal sepsis.

175 nt of abscesses associated with experimental intraabdominal sepsis.

176 y mediate CpG-inducible host defenses during intraabdominal sepsis.

177 that beta 2M-/- mice are resistant to lethal intraabdominal sepsis.

178 esion formation associated with experimental intraabdominal sepsis.

179 citis is the most common condition requiring intraabdominal surgery in infancy and childhood.

180 Increased intraabdominal (visceral) fat is associated with a high

181 elf occupying virtually all of the available intraabdominal volume.