ライフサイエンスコーパス: physeal

1 istration of (153)Sm-EDTMP on the developing physeal and articular cartilage of healthy, juvenile rab

2 fect of MR images on the decision to perform physeal bar excision.

3 Fifteen patients with suspected physeal bars were examined with MR imaging.

4 imaging is an excellent modality for imaging physeal bars.

5 62 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 0.38) than it was in physeal cartilage (1.28 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 0.31) (P <.

6 only source compartments contributing to the physeal cartilage doses of 50.0 mGy/MBq for the proximal

7 ls expand in response to trauma, and produce physeal cartilage for growth plate tissue regeneration.

8 on of the effects of 153Sm-EDTMP on immature physeal cartilage is warranted to develop optimized trea

9 nically significant damage to the developing physeal cartilage may occur as a result of the intraveno

10 clinically significant damage to developing physeal cartilage might occur as a result of systemic 15

11 The physeal cartilage of epiphyses and apophyses is the weak

12 als were sacrificed at 16 wk of age, and the physeal cartilage of multiple bones was evaluated by use

13 The 153Sm absorbed doses to the physeal cartilage were consistent with values that can c

14 nd distal femoral structures, epiphyseal and physeal cartilage, and epiphyseal and metaphyseal marrow

15 he radiation-absorbed doses delivered to the physeal cartilage.

16 0%-73% of which localized within 3 mm of the physeal cartilage.

17 nsity lower than the signal intensity of the physeal cartilage.

18 ondrocytes and their origin in proliferating physeal chondrocytes.

19 Due to concerns of premature physeal closure (PPC), a partial clinical hold was insti

20 anged with age, with individuals approaching physeal closure having shorter tracts in a random arrang

21 bbit proximal tibial physis results in early physeal closure, which is accompanied by a transient ele

22 Purpose To validate physeal DTI metrics as predictors of height velocity (1-

23 Physeal DTI tract volume and length were correlated with

24 atterns that were distinct from archetypical physeal endochondral ossification.

25 Physeal-epiphyseal demarcation, visibility of the second

26 Physeal-epiphyseal demarcation, visibility of the second

27 and level of injury within the cartilage in physeal fracture-separations can be defined with MR imag

28 Physeal fracture-separations were evaluated with MR imag

29 tal growth and approached adult values after physeal fusion.

30 rmal and may be due to infections, traumatic physeal injuries, genetic predisposition, metabolic fact

31 y immature patients due to the potential for physeal injury and resultant growth disturbance.

32 th and bone remodeling potential, minimizing physeal injury, and aggressive treatment of open fractur

33 sed to yield both 3D rendered and projection physeal maps that are particularly useful in preoperativ

34 ese values and patient age, patient sex, and physeal patency were assessed.

35 between metaphyseal stripe visualization and physeal patency were significant (P <.001).

36 ories that were based on stripe presence and physeal patency.

37 maging findings differentiate epiphyseal and physeal regions and correlate with histologic findings.

38 Contiguous physeal relationship (89%, 66 of 74), periosteal reactio

39 The anterior physeal step (APS) measured 3.8 mm on the right side.

40 acement of the femoral head epiphysis with a physeal step was seen on the longitudinal section obtain

41 ntensity and relaxation time were greater in physeal than in epiphyseal cartilage (P < .01).

42 T2 is slower in physeal than in epiphyseal cartilage, probably reflectin