コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
3 after nitroglycerin administration with less ST-segment depression (P=0.003) and therefore myocardial
5 ncluding younger age of onset, more frequent ST-segment depression, higher prevalence of neurologic d
7 median of 5 electrocardiography leads showed ST-segment deviation (quartile [Q]1 to Q3: 4 to 6); 49.8
8 METHODS AND Participants were patients with ST-segment-elevated MI who were randomly assigned to rec
9 tion, and presented more frequently with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome compared wi
10 lder than 18 years with unstable angina, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or S
11 vely enrolled 27 patients with anterior wall ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 4
12 se 2, a 49-year-old gentleman presented with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and h
13 elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with
17 syndrome (25%), which consisted of both non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (14%) and S
18 isk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) after non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS)
19 ctive invasive strategy in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS)
20 ecurrent ischemia only) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS).
21 s consisting of patients admitted with a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, we constru
22 A total of 8,404 patients, with or without ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, were rando
24 ntithrombotic treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes awaiting c
25 of antithrombotic drugs to patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes before cor
27 omized study involving 240 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes to compare
31 reased heart rate in 6 BrS patients, reduced ST-segment elevation and increased fractionation were ob
32 isorders with diagnostic electrocardiograms (ST-segment elevation and prolonged QT interval, respecti
35 20; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.70) in the subgroup of ST-segment elevation MI (n = 1,229), but not in non-ST-s
37 n-hospital reperfusion rates and outcomes of ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) in renal transplant reci
38 ar risk of incident MI (0.8% annually), with ST-segment elevation MI constituting one-third of all ca
40 20% of MI cases and presented more often as ST-segment elevation MI versus MI not related to a stent
41 care units, age 63 +/- 12 years, with large ST-segment elevation MI within 6 h of symptom onset, Thr
43 % had ST-segment elevation MI, 74.3% had non-ST-segment elevation MI, and 8.9% had ventricular tachyc
46 SCAD patients more frequently presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (57% vs. 36%;
49 0; 95% CI: -0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coeffici
50 without PCI or in those with a diagnosis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (group by PCI
51 in CD4(+) T cells from 20 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), 20
52 d clinical trial involving patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
53 r the care and outcomes of patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
54 The trial included 9,326 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)/unst
55 CI: 0.62 to 0.91), and those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 0.63, 95
57 an alternative to mechanical reperfusion for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in se
58 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may n
59 ical trial, we enrolled patients with either ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or no
60 ly IV beta-blockers before PPCI in a general ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) popul
63 ovement in clinical outcome in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treat
64 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treat
65 tor antagonists are delayed in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) under
66 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were
78 on myocardial infarction [STEMI] and 241 non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI] case
79 nostic coronary angiography, of whom 281 (40 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] and 2
82 cularization strategies in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivess
83 led trials have suggested that patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivess
84 revascularization in clinical scenarios with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-se
85 on-infarct-related arteries in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction has been demo
86 ation myocardial infarction (group by PCI or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction interaction e
87 of limiting the extent of necrosis during an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is of great i
89 ected patients presenting with suspected non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to the emerge
90 orithm for rapid rule-out and rule-in of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction using high-se
92 ment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were consider
93 y, Spain, and the Netherlands, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly
94 with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were abou
95 ary Stents in the Treatment of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) were screene
96 dial infarction and 87,915 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 88,542 (96.4
97 follow-up, and specifically in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, are scarce.
98 Tn concentrations even in the absence of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, concern has
99 entation in heart failure, presentation with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, creatinine c
100 tervention (when indicated) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, no guideline
101 neous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, we use hiera
107 omized (mean age 55+/-9 years; 75% male; 56% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 38% non-ST-s
108 ent elevation myocardial infarction; 38% non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 6% unstable
109 us Coronary Intervention on Occlusions After ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction; NTR1108).
111 10.8%] vs 90 of 1292 [7.0%]; P = .03), while ST-segment elevation was found more frequently in patien
114 patency, the quantitative intracoronary ECG ST-segment elevation, and angina pectoris during the sam
115 al reperfusion, including the ischemic time, ST-segment elevation, angiographic blush grade, and CFR,
116 tients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, bleeding assessed with the BARC sc
117 ation in the entire right ventricle, without ST-segment elevation, fractionation, or repolarization a
118 tients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, with or without early invasive str
121 n compared with patients presenting with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).
122 tcomes by age among 76 141 patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome enrolled in
123 UTURA/OASIS-8) trial, 2026 patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome treated wit
124 bution of enrollment by age in phase III non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome trials was
125 s medical therapy alone in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing
126 the index angiogram in all patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome who underwe
127 Although the majority of patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome who underwe
128 class I clinical practice guideline for non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes, there is
129 riven by the high mortality rate observed in ST-segment-elevation AMI patients with detectable cytoch
131 who underwent coronary angiography for acute ST-segment-elevation and non-ST-segment-elevation MI in
132 t-of-hospital sudden death, and hospitalized ST-segment-elevation and non-ST-segment-elevation myocar
133 S versus immediate stenting in patients with ST-segment-elevation infarction undergoing primary percu
134 ar and cerebrovascular events for those with ST-segment-elevation MI (STEMI) compared with those with
135 (ST-segment-elevation MI [STEMI] versus non-ST-segment-elevation MI [NSTEMI]) might shed light on th
136 the relationship of AF with the type of MI (ST-segment-elevation MI [STEMI] versus non-ST-segment-el
137 me course of edema reaction in patients with ST-segment-elevation MI by CMR and assessed its implicat
139 raphy for acute ST-segment-elevation and non-ST-segment-elevation MI in the National Cardiovascular D
140 ged alive, STEMI patients (compared with non-ST-segment-elevation MI patients) were found to have a l
142 R examinations were performed: patients with ST-segment-elevation MI were serially scanned (within th
143 ive cohort study in patients with reperfused ST-segment-elevation MI who underwent cardiac magnetic r
144 tals implemented with full EHRs; however, in ST-segment-elevation MI, differences in outcomes were no
148 rvention (MIMI) trial, patients (n=140) with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction </=12 hours w
149 nessed arrest (84.6% versus 77.4%), and have ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (32.7% versus
150 per year, a smaller proportion were PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (8.4%) than i
151 s coronary intervention in 283 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (mean+/-SD ag
152 e success of coronary reperfusion therapy in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) is commo
153 ery disease (FFR</=0.8) in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (n=21) who un
154 cardial infarction (n=5996, 853 deaths), non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (n=5371, 901
155 ive survival was estimated for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (n=5996, 853
157 vation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) mana
158 % confidence interval, 2.88-7.95; P<0.0001), ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (OR, 2.10; 95
159 47 was associated inversely with smoking and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (P=0.004; odd
161 rtery bypass grafting (CABG) presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and u
162 imary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are s
164 nary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has b
165 ival for overweight and obese patients after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has b
167 of persistent T2 hyperintensity after acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is un
168 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patie
170 ogy, but data on their long-term outcomes in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) setti
171 e direct immediate intervention and therapy, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) victi
172 iated with adverse outcomes in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
174 ardiac magnetic resonance (MR) imaging after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
175 rognostic utility in patients after an acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
176 tal cardiac arrest patients (n=1078) without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction admitted to t
177 o determine if timing of cell delivery after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction affects recov
178 1-year cumulative survival for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction aged >/=76 ye
179 ed versus angiography-guided primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction among patient
180 wn to have prognostic value in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiac a
181 idities and were less likely to present with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogen
182 complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess
183 We prospectively enrolled 49 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and performed
184 eous coronary intervention for elective, non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and ST-segmen
185 nger age categories and in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and stable an
186 ) in the United States for patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and the compa
187 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction are at increa
189 rfusion times and mortality in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction are influence
191 ions in time to reperfusion in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction as well as in
192 with ST between EES and BMS in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction at 5 years.
193 riage of survivors of cardiac arrest without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction at the point
194 scoring model was developed and validated on ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction cohorts from
196 Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction did not impro
198 by 9254 operators at 1538 hospitals for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction from 2009 to
200 reperfusion therapy for patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction have been doc
201 ive sample of patients in China admitted for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in 2001, 2006
202 cerebrovascular events within 3 years after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in patients u
203 ely 4% to 5%, a figure comparable to that of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of
204 left ventricular and clinical outcomes after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction independently
205 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction indications i
206 rimary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction is a serious
209 ndings support efforts to implement regional ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction networks focu
210 (FDG) for glucose uptake was performed in 21 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients at a
211 patients, the healing pattern in event-free ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients diff
213 r obstruction, which occurs in around 50% of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients post
214 sence of intramyocardial hemorrhage (IMH) in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients repe
215 phy and magnetic resonance in the reperfused ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients show
216 mplete Revascularization), we randomized 627 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients to f
217 provides better prognostic stratification of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients trea
222 ND In this prospective study, 88 consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were
224 in serum levels were significantly higher in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with
225 reserve-guided complete revascularization in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with
226 METHODS AND Hospitals (n=167 with 23 498 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients) wer
228 ognostic value over clinical risk factors in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.
229 the area at risk delineated by T2 mapping in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.
230 eventing adverse LV remodeling in reperfused ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.
231 elop and validate a CMR-based risk score for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.
233 esenting with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction remains unkno
234 e analysis of bivalirudin versus UFH for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction to date, biva
235 MVO in a cohort of consecutive patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with
236 d with reduced infarct size in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe
237 ects of NAC on infarct size in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe
238 s immediate stenting, in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr
241 g with an acute coronary syndrome, including ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were enrolled
244 tion) in diabetes mellitus patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction who had angio
246 cept for those (n=78, 23.6%) presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction who underwent
247 ar (24.2%), but proportionally more were for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction with cardioge
248 119 matched patients hospitalized for acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction without cardi
249 ting stent implantation in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction would provide
252 2015 included 120 cases; 75% presented with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and 80% had
253 O-PCI) in patients with multivessel disease, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and cardioge
254 coronary microcirculation in the setting of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and how they
255 ong predictor of functional improvement post ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, but recovery
256 ikely to include high-risk features, such as ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic
258 coronary artery disease presenting with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, only one thi
260 patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, there may be
261 ollow-up study, 181 patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, undergoing p
262 oing PCI for STEMI or other indications (non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, unstable ang
286 ary artery blood flow in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction; however, fai
287 versus placebo in 120 patients with anterior ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarctions resulting in
288 ing analyses of patients with large anterior ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarctions, bone marrow
290 determine the pathophysiologic basis of the ST-segment in the BrS-ECG with data from various epicard
291 interpretation, appropriate monitoring, and ST-segment monitoring when indicated), the intervention
292 ach is that it captures small changes in the ST segment over time that cannot be detected by visual i
293 ed improvements in the surrogate outcomes of ST segment resolution and distal embolisation, but wheth
295 in the culprit artery (P=0.020), incomplete ST-segment resolution (P=0.037), and higher troponin (P=
296 The primary endpoint was incidence of >/=70% ST-segment resolution 60 min after TIMI flow grade 3.
297 This study investigated whether CsA improved ST-segment resolution in a randomized, multicenter phase
298 neous coronary intervention had no effect on ST-segment resolution or hs-cTnT, and did not improve cl
299 ion trial, the primary end point of complete ST-segment resolution was significantly improved with th
300 ial Infarction) blush grade, and no (</=30%) ST-segment resolution were not associated with these pat
301 -wave onset to R-peak, R-peak to R-wave end, ST-segment, T-wave onset to T-peak, and T-peak to T-wave
WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。