ライフサイエンスコーパス: vegetative state

1 protracted neurodegenerative course and semi-vegetative state.

2 rders of consciousness, such as coma and the vegetative state.

3 es characteristic of deep anesthesia and the vegetative state.

4 inimally conscious state and 1 as being in a vegetative state.

5 ctures) virtually synonymous with persistent vegetative state.

6 were severely impaired, and 3 (1%) were in a vegetative state.

7 nalized, to maintain them in the N(2)-fixing vegetative state.

8 ly responding to commands despite being in a vegetative state.

9 nse in a patient who was behaviorally in the vegetative state.

10 hree whose behavioural diagnosis suggested a vegetative state.

11 t fulfilling the criteria for a diagnosis of vegetative state.

12 ths and 2 women who remained in a persistent vegetative state.

13 were moderately or severely disabled or in a vegetative state.

14 diagnosis, eight died and one remained in a vegetative state.

15 such as sleep, drug-induced anaesthesia and vegetative states.

16 ange, 0-29, with 29 being the worst outcome [vegetative state]).

17 sabled (39% vs 10%), survive in a persistent vegetative state (13% vs 2%), or have died (39% vs 7%).

18 patients survived at 24 months; 4 were in a vegetative state, 2 had lower and 7 had upper severe dis

19 s compared with nonmonitored patients (death/vegetative state: 39.2% vs 40.6%; severe disability: 33.

20 ients had a CPC of 4.6 (0.7) (4 = persistent vegetative state; 5 = death).

21 nts versus 52.0% among 179 medical patients; vegetative state, 6.2% versus 1.7%; lower severe disabil

22 .9% among 188 patients in the medical group; vegetative state, 8.5% versus 2.1%; lower severe disabil

23 nverts the reproductive shoot apex to a more vegetative state, a phenotype that is similar to that se

24 95% CI, -30.8 to -10.2]) and higher rates of vegetative state (absolute difference, 4.3 [95% CI, 0.0

25 onic disorders of consciousness, such as the vegetative state (also termed unresponsive wakefulness s

26 s and no increase in the number of deaths or vegetative states among the patients given pegorgotein,

27 clinical methods to diagnose patients in the vegetative state and about the length of time before rec

28 er of the central nervous system, leads to a vegetative state and death within 3-5 years once clinica

29 ing persons with disorders of consciousness (vegetative state and minimally conscious state).

30 ng arguments over misdiagnosis of persistent vegetative state and raising false hopes for neurologica

31 The vegetative state and the minimally conscious state are d

32 eatment effect was similar for patients in a vegetative state and those in a minimally conscious stat

33 and disorders of consciousness such as coma, vegetative state, and minimally conscious state are clea

34 nd in pathological conditions, such as coma, vegetative state, and minimally conscious state.

35 When death, vegetative state, and severe disability at 6 months were

36 d that a significant number of patients in a vegetative state are covertly aware and capable of follo

37 Among participants in a vegetative state at 2 weeks, 62 of 79 (78%) regained con

38 lation treatments have been disappointing in vegetative state but occasionally improve minimally cons

39 who fulfilled all clinical criteria for the vegetative state but produced repeated evidence of cover

40 ts referred to the study with a diagnosis of vegetative state did in fact demonstrate neural correlat

41 More important, 1 patient, who had been in a vegetative state for 12 years before the scanning and su

42 iousness did not differentiate patients in a vegetative state from patients in a minimally conscious

43 The categorical GOSE was studied from vegetative state (GOSE2) to upper good recovery (GOSE8).

44 Over 75% of participants rated a vegetative state (GOSE2, absence of awareness and bedrid

45 Mutants ultimately arrested at a terminal vegetative state harboring shoot meristems that were gro

46 Vegetative state has a poor prognosis for recovery of aw

47 Interest in the persistent vegetative state has focused on the accuracy of diagnosi

48 er wakefulness nor awareness; a patient in a vegetative state has wakefulness without awareness; and

49 deprived of interleukin-3 survive in a more vegetative state, in which the cells are smaller, have l

50 tures of the lipid profiles observed for the vegetative states included sets of phosphatidylglycerol

51 current medical understanding of persistent vegetative state, including the requirements for patient

52 A diagnosis of vegetative state is made if a patient demonstrates no ev

53 The vegetative state is often described clinically as loss o

54 e existence of normal sleep in patients in a vegetative state is still a matter of debate.

55 Greater clarity regarding the persistent vegetative state, less apprehension of the presumed myst

56 sing disorders of consciousness (e.g., coma, vegetative-state, locked-in syndrome), these theories ar

57 ulted in lower mortality and higher rates of vegetative state, lower severe disability, and upper sev

58 ers and patients, (2) clinical entities (eg, vegetative state, minimally conscious state), (3) clinic

59 led (n = 13), severely disabled (n = 12) and vegetative state (n = 12); and controls.

60 covery Scale-Revised indicated coma (n = 2), vegetative state (n = 3), minimally conscious state with

61 o met the diagnostic criteria for either the vegetative state (n = 7), the minimally conscious state

62 n 32.2% of those in the craniectomy group; a vegetative state occurred in 2.3% and 2.8%, respectively

63 , and 8 to 9 points for severe disability to vegetative state or coma.

64 Outcomes were categorized as persistent vegetative state or death vs. awakening.

65 on of pain, as is the case for patients in a vegetative state or end-stage Alzheimer's disease.

66 nd may therefore lead to the misdiagnosis of vegetative state or minimally conscious state in patient

67 Treatment decisions for patients in vegetative state or minimally conscious state should fol

68 ging (fMRI) to determine whether he was in a vegetative state or minimally conscious state.

69 , in the assessment of patients diagnosed as vegetative state or minimally conscious state.

70 t who may be misidentified as remaining in a vegetative state or one of the similar conditions formul

71 sponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS; formerly vegetative state) or in a minimally conscious state (MCS

72 ic electroencephalogram (EEG, attesting to a vegetative state) or were too ill to travel.

73 Diffuse spasticity, dementia, vegetative state, or death ensues.

74 Outcome was poor (severe disability, vegetative state, or death) in 31 of 52 patients in the

75 me was poor (defined as severe disability, a vegetative state, or death) in 57 percent of the patient

76 disability] versus poor [severe disability, vegetative state, or death]) at greater than or equal to

77 , those with a behavioral diagnosis of coma, vegetative state, or minimally conscious state-minus) an

78 outcome was poor outcome, defined as death, vegetative state, or severe disability (Glasgow Outcome

79 zations had poor outcomes, defined as death, vegetative state, or severe disability at 6 months.

80 epsilon4 had an unfavourable outcome (dead, vegetative state, or severe disability) compared with 16

81 a report of a single patient in a persistent vegetative state, Owen et al. claimed that the presence

82 sability, and 10.2% among those in a coma or vegetative state (P<0.001 for all comparisons).

83 in function in minimally conscious state and vegetative state patients.

84 For patients with permanent vegetative states, physicians should offer and recommend

85 are and management of patients in persistent vegetative state (PVS) has been the subject of sustained

86 To study five patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) with different behavioural featur

87 fulfilling the behavioural criteria for the vegetative state retain islands of preserved cognitive f

88 d reduction in mortality and higher rates of vegetative state, severe disability, and moderate disabi

89 non-traumatic aetiology) with a diagnosis of vegetative state showed no significant activation in res

90 arnt since Jennett and Plum coined the term 'vegetative state', the assessment process remains largel

91 ologies of wakefulness: coma, the persistent vegetative state, the 'locked-in' syndrome, akinetic mut

92 ingers regarding the diagnosis of persistent vegetative state, the judicial processes involved, and t

93 delines on the management of patients in the vegetative state, the views of physicians in the USA and

94 s with eye opening and unresponsiveness in a vegetative state, then limited recovery of responsivenes

95 rary to the diagnostic criteria defining the vegetative state, three patients (1 traumatic, 2 non-tra

96 n tomato as they gradually transition from a vegetative state to a terminal flower.

97 allowed a patient who was assumed to be in a vegetative state to communicate.

98 hat AGL22 is involved in the transition from vegetative state to flowering but here we show that AGL2

99 uding definitions of terms such as coma, the vegetative state, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, min

100 We enrolled 119 consecutive patients: 72 vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness state (VS/UWS)

101 ing disorders of consciousness (DoC) such as vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/U

102 A cohort of 127 patients in vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (VS/U

103 om 73 patients in minimally conscious state, vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and c

104 nts in minimally conscious state compared to vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome encom

105 ew York: five minimally conscious state, one vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, one

106 1 patients (26 minimally conscious state, 19 vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, six

107 ional MRI data acquired from 18 patients (11 vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, VS/U

108 patients in a minimally conscious state and vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome.

109 en patients in minimally conscious state and vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome.

110 Salzburg: 10 minimally conscious state, five vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome; New

111 the system into either a stable flowering or vegetative state upon floral induction.

112 Fifty-two patients--19 in a vegetative state (VS), 27 in a minimally conscious state

113 that enable the crucial distinction between vegetative state (VS)-also coined unresponsive wakefulne

114 ate of wakeful unawareness, referred to as a vegetative state (VS).

115 minimally conscious state [MCS] and 43 in a vegetative state [VS]).

116 Vegetative state was not reported due to lack of data fr

117 cedure (hybrid neurosurgery) the patient, in vegetative state, was transferred to the intensive care

118 ttempt to define the structural basis of the vegetative state we have undertaken a detailed neuropath

119 (1 in a minimally conscious state and 1 in a vegetative state) were also able to guide their attentio

120 ix in a minimally conscious state, five in a vegetative state) were studied to correlate the electrop

121 cess by which a dormant spore returns to its vegetative state when exposed to suitable conditions.

122 te-matter tracts that connect them cause the vegetative state, which is wakefulness without awareness

123 In contrast, for most patients in a vegetative state, while preserved behavioural sleep was

124 ogical, sleep wake patterns in patients in a vegetative state, while there were near-to-normal patter

125 some patients in behaviourally unresponsive vegetative states who demonstrated evidence of covert aw

126 association of hypotension with death and/or vegetative state within 6 months and incidence of hypote