ライフサイエンスコーパス: EGD

1 EGD and biopsy had been performed in 4 patients resultin

2 EGD performed 2+/-1 days post ablation demonstrated supe

3 EGD was most commonly performed to evaluate dyspepsia an

4 outpatient control groups were recruited: 1) EGD Group, subjects matched to Barrett's esophagus cases

5 Of 149 EGDs and 224 colonoscopies, 17.6% and 14.7% respectively

6 erapy (EGD-->BB) if varices are present, (2) EGD followed by endoscopic band ligation (EBL) (EGD-->EB

7 ded 287 patients (54 Barrett's esophagus, 62 EGD, and 171 colonoscopy subjects).

8 imately 12% of Medicare beneficiaries had an EGD between 2004 and 2006 (n = 108 785).

9 in 3 Medicare beneficiaries who received an EGD had a repeated EGD within 3 years.

10 GD) in 11 of 36 patients, and on both CT and EGD in 10 of 36 patients.

11 r L. monocytogenes strains, 10403S, LO28 and EGD, all commonly regarded as wild-type isolates, and fi

12 In the case of 10403S, LO28 and EGD, several other readily metabolized mono- and disacch

13 ed every 3 months, and HVPG measurements and EGD were done annually.

14 inide then increased arrhythmic tendency and EGD ratio but conserved DeltaAPD90; reduced EGD ratios a

15 ed electrogram durations (EGD), expressed as EGD ratios, in arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/Delta hearts, and p

16 The correlation between EGD and HRES was r = .50.

17 ients had their initial endoscopic biopsies (EGDs) reviewed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

18 l patients were correctly identified by both EGD and HRES as grade I (no varices).

19 ns revealed more endoscopic findings in both EGD (46.3% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.049) and colonoscopy (23.6%

20 w (1.2 pMol per 10(9) cells per minute), but EGD-e transported [59Fe]-apoferrichrome similarly to E.

21 stematic reintroduction of foods followed by EGD and biopsies (n = 20).

22 ion, followed by sedated conventional EGD (c-EGD) (Olympus GIF-100 or GIF-Q140) by a staff endoscopis

23 GD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed.

24 s only slightly worse than that of sedated c-EGD (median, 2 vs. 1 on a scale of 1-10).

25 dollars (+/- 100.8 US dollars) for sedated C-EGD and 328.6 US dollars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsed

26 s satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EGD and are just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EG

27 randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar.

28 In patients, compared with sedated c-EGD, sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were 96% and 97% accur

29 randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD.

30 nd to have NDBE on their first 2 consecutive EGDs.

31 ) sedation, followed by sedated conventional EGD (c-EGD) (Olympus GIF-100 or GIF-Q140) by a staff end

32 athin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed.

33 ts and complications of sedated conventional EGD.

34 Excessive gingival display (EGD) has a negative impact on a pleasant smile.

35 who had underdone esophago-gastro-duodenal (EGD) video endoscopy at two general hospitals in Erzurum

36 urations, expressed as electrogram duration (EGD) ratios, with shortening S1-S2 intervals in arrhythm

37 emonstrated increased electrogram durations (EGD), expressed as EGD ratios, in arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/

38 tal LOS for low-risk UGIH patients was early EGD.

39 followed by endoscopic band ligation (EBL) (EGD-->EBL) if varices are present, (3) selective screeni

40 diagnostic esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy for health examination were enrolle

41 rategies: (1) universal screening endoscopy (EGD) followed by beta-blocker (BB) therapy (EGD-->BB) if

42 Upper endoscopy (EGD) was performed in 961 persons with no prior history

43 y in 1 from 10 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD), 0 from 7 colonoscopies, 3 from 5 push enteroscopie

44 EoE underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs), biopsies, and skin-prick tests for food and aeroa

45 Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is done often for various indications.

46 provided 18,444 esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reports, 20,748 colonoscopy reports, and 9767 flexi

47 comorbidity, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) findings to predict risk of adverse events.

48 E at their first esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

49 er PV isolation, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed to assess the incidence of ETLs.

50 complications of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) are related to sedation.

51 , and results of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), manometry, and pH monitoring were collected and an

52 ith dyspepsia on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for rapid urease test, histology and PCR examinatio

53 53 patients, on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in 11 of 36 patients, and on both CT and EGD in 10

54 of preresection esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in predicting the patients in whom surgery could po

55 elines recommend esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with cirrhosis to screen for gastroesop

56 CE could replace esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy under certain circumstances.

57 ho had undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy or both for abdominal complaints at th

58 Unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using conventional 8-11-mm endoscopes is an alterna

59 ideotaped HRES and videotaped esophagoscopy (EGD).

60 assification index was 37.8% (P = 0.002) for EGD and 110.9% (P <0.001) for colonoscopy, thus improvin

61 Per patient costs ($Canadian) were $1475 for EGD + WC, $1014 for ESM + WC, and $906 for ESM + SC.

62 ients with CT-identified varices and 18% for EGD-identified varices.

63 ver correlation for HRES was r = .88 and for EGD was r = .79.

64 en the two most common sedation regimens for EGD and colonoscopy in our hospital.

65 n patients with endoscopic findings, both in EGD (58.2% vs. 33.0%, P = 0.005) and in colonoscopy (57.

66 In addition to the changes in EGD ratio shown by WT hearts, these findings attribute a

67 Flecainide increased EGD ratios in WT (at 10 microM) and non-arrhythmogenic S

68 n the presence of quinidine, which increased EGD ratio but left DeltaAPD90 unchanged.

69 e used to identify patients who had an index EGD between 2004 and 2006.

70 with repeated EGD within 3 years of an index EGD.

71 ates in association with H pylori on initial EGD and EUS biopsies.

72 Of all patients with initial EGDs, 10% (n = 11 370) had an associated diagnosis sugge

73 es of two Listeria species, L. monocytogenes EGD-e and L. innocua CLIP 11262, contain homologous gene

74 lococcus aureus 502a, Listeria monocytogenes EGD, Escherichia coli ML35, and Cryptococcus neoformans

75 e sleep apnea, compared with 42% (n = 26) of EGD subjects (OR 1.73, 95% CI [0.83, 3.62]) and 37% (n =

76 rmed in 961 persons with no prior history of EGD who were scheduled for colonoscopy.

77 crown lengthening (ECL) for the treatment of EGD.

78 le alternative approach for the treatment of EGD.

79 t of the 10 patients with no varices seen on EGD had varices identified by HRES.

80 The largest varix seen on EGD was graded on a 5-point scale.

81 nts scheduled to undergo elective outpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD

82 Preresection EGD is not reliable for determining the presence of resi

83 wenty-two of the 35 underwent a preresection EGD before resection.

84 had negative pathology from the preresection EGD, but seven of the 17 (41%) had residual tumor at sur

85 EGD ratio but conserved DeltaAPD90; reduced EGD ratios and unaltered DeltaAPD90 values accompanied t

86 croM), whereas quinidine (10 microM) reduced EGD ratios and prolonged VERPs in WT and arrhythmogenic

87 arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/Delta hearts, reducing EGD ratio and restoring DeltaAPD90 to + 7.55 +/- 2.24 ms

88 esions were in the healing process on repeat EGD 4+/-2 days after initial endoscopy.

89 l ETLs were in the healing process on repeat EGD.

90 r 6 weeks of SFED, patients underwent repeat EGD and biopsies.

91 se, 33% (n = 36 331) had at least 1 repeated EGD within 3 years.

92 ficiaries who received an EGD had a repeated EGD within 3 years.

93 tle is known about the frequency of repeated EGD and the diagnoses that drive it.

94 patients with diagnoses at index or repeated EGD that did not suggest the need for a repeated examina

95 id not have a diagnosis at index or repeated EGD that justified a repeated examination.

96 the index diagnosis suggested that repeated EGD was expected, uncertain, or not expected.

97 9 687) came from the group in which repeated EGD was not expected.

98 Proportion of patients with repeated EGD within 3 years of an index EGD.

99 excluded, 43% of all patients with repeated EGDs (n = 15 706) did not have a diagnosis at index or r

100 of unsedated small-caliber transoral EGD (sc-EGD).

101 t of the technical feasibility of sedated sc-EGD and the tolerability of unsedated sc-EGD, respective

102 ndoscopist blinded to the findings of the sc-EGD.

103 determined by having each patient undergo sc-EGD (Pentax EG-1840) with (phase 3) and without (phase 4

104 Unsedated sc-EGD is technically feasible, tolerable, and accurate.

105 The overall acceptability of unsedated sc-EGD was only slightly worse than that of sedated c-EGD (

106 with sedated c-EGD, sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were 96% and 97% accurate, respectively.

107 gnostic accuracy of sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were determined by having each patient undergo sc-EG

108 Sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were technically feasible and tolerable in all volun

109 After unsedated sc-EGD, 98% of patients expressed willingness to undergo th

110 sc-EGD and the tolerability of unsedated sc-EGD, respectively, in volunteers.

111 Strain EGD-e used iron complexes of hydroxamates (ferrichrome a

112 )-dependent promoter sequences in the strain EGD-e genome sequence.

113 verall K(M) of Hn uptake by wild-type strain EGD-e was 1 nM, and it occurred at similar rates (V(max)

114 well-characterized L. monocytogenes strains: EGD, 10403, Mack (serotype1/2a), L028 (serotype 1/2c), S

115 NDBE on 3, 4, and 5 consecutive surveillance EGDs.

116 strategy, in turn, both the EGD-->BB and the EGD-->EBL strategies cost over $175,000 more per additio

117 ric beta-blocker strategy, in turn, both the EGD-->BB and the EGD-->EBL strategies cost over $175,000

118 y reported FosX encoded in the genome of the EGD strain of L. monocytogenes (FosXLMEGD).

119 (EGD) followed by beta-blocker (BB) therapy (EGD-->BB) if varices are present, (2) EGD followed by en

120 ccuracy of unsedated small-caliber transoral EGD (sc-EGD).

121 ndomized trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a

122 2013, 25,037 patients from Erzurum underwent EGD procedures under either intravenous sedation or loca

123 Unsedated EGD using ultrathin 5-6-mm endoscopes is better tolerate

124 trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse

125 llars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsedated UT-EGD (P < 0.0001).

126 stics of patients randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar.

127 Patients undergoing unsedated UT-EGD are as satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EG

128 tpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD.

129 Unsedated UT-EGD was also faster, less costly, and may allow greater

130 re just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EGD.

131 2) ESM + WC and 3) endoscopically placed WC (EGD + WC) using publicly funded health care system persp

132 replace biopsy as the mode of diagnosis when EGD is either declined or contraindicated, or when duode

133 was conducted in 28 patients presenting with EGD.