1 he inflammatory process, before the onset of mucosal ulceration.

2 itating condition involving painful and deep mucosal ulcerations.

3 ed from DSS-induced intestinal adhesions and mucosal ulcerations.

4 ntil the proximal to mid jejunum and jejunal mucosal ulcerations.

5                           Of 6 patients with mucosal ulceration, 3 improved.

6 of m3EGF1,2 per rectum significantly reduced mucosal ulceration and apoptosis in experimental acute c

7  had severe intestinal defects that included mucosal ulcerations, epithelial cell sloughing, and infl

8 core for CD [SES-CD] of 7 or more, 1 or more mucosal ulcerations [identified by endoscopy], and failu

9 tumoral diameter was 85 mm (55-250 mm), with mucosal ulceration in 4 patients, preoperative capsular

10 hat resulted in little epithelial damage and mucosal ulceration in wild type mice, caused marked colo

11 ed (18)F-FDG uptake was found in 87% of deep mucosal ulcerations in IBD patients, whereas mild endosc

12 y presents as endoscopically visible surface mucosal ulcerations, irregularities, or polyploidal mass

13 leal-centered process that could progress to mucosal ulceration; later episodes (more than 100 days p

14  E-GIST enucleation, and (iii) the impact of mucosal ulceration on outcome.

15                Acute laryngeal injury (i.e., mucosal ulceration or granulation tissue in the larynx)

16 reduced TNBS-induced weight loss (P< 0.001), mucosal ulceration (P<0.05), myeloperoxidase activity (P

17 l diameter was 40 mm (18-65 mm), without any mucosal ulceration, preoperative capsular ruptures, or i

18                                   Endoscopic mucosal ulceration was associated with more aggressive t

19                       The baseline degree of mucosal ulceration was documented by ileocolonoscopy.

20  on CD activity index (CDAI) scores >220 and mucosal ulcerations, who received open-label vedolizumab