ライフサイエンスコーパス: TMLR

1 TMLR did not influence blood flow in the acute setting.

2 TMLR has been shown to reduce angina in severely disease

3 TMLR is an emerging surgical technique for the treatment

4 TMLR performed in patients with refractory angina pector

5 TMLR relieves angina and may also improve blood flow in

6 TMLR was performed in the anterior wall (approximately 1

7 After TMLR, CCS class was 2.2+/-1.7 at FU-1 and 2.4+/-1 at FU-

8 eks (FU-1) and 34.6+/-4.7 weeks (FU-2) after TMLR performed with a synchronized, high-powered CO(2) l

9 ischemic segments (47% before vs. 23% after TMLR, p < 0.0008), with no change in the percentage of i

10 infarcted segments (23% before vs. 26% after TMLR).

11 WMSI at peak stress improved markedly after TMLR (1.70 +/- 0.30 after vs. 2.06 +/- 0.31 before TMLR,

12 ore vs. 34 +/- 9 micrograms/kg per min after TMLR) achieved at peak stress also increased postoperati

13 ts/min before vs. 102 +/- 21 beats/min after TMLR, p = 0.01) and dobutamine infusion rate (26 +/- 9 m

14 segments did not change significantly after TMLR, although there was a mild improvement in the WMSI

15 emia during noninvasive stress testing after TMLR are rare.

16 d and nonlasered regions was unchanged after TMLR.

17 ith refractory angina were randomly assigned TMLR plus normal medication or medical management alone.

18 1.70 +/- 0.30 after vs. 2.06 +/- 0.31 before TMLR, p < 0.002), with the improvement in WMSI limited t

19 1.47 +/- 0.31 after vs. 2.15 +/- 0.34 before TMLR, p < 0.0004).

20 1.64 +/- 0.34 after vs. 1.78 +/- 0.34 before TMLR, p < 0.05).

21 utamine stress echocardiography (DSE) before TMLR.

22 Compared with that before TMLR, wall motion at rest for all myocardial segments di

23 Because endovascular techniques for TMLR are currently under development, we investigated th

24 0.16 in the control group vs. 0.73+/-0.08 in TMLR animals, p < 0.05).

25 walk distance was 33 m (-7 to 74) further in TMLR patients than medical-management patients (p=0.108)

26 In this canine model of chronic ischemia, TMLR significantly enhances angiogenesis as evidenced by

27 the most common double mutants: T790M/L858R (TMLR) and T790M/del(746-750) (TMdel).

28 decreased by at least two classes in 25% of TMLR and 4% of medical-management patients at 12 months

29 Our findings show that the adoption of TMLR cannot be advocated.

30 e hypothesis that the symptomatic benefit of TMLR can be ascribed to improved myocardial perfusion or

31 We aimed to assess the effect of TMLR on MBF and coronary vasodilator reserve (CVR).

32 trolled trial to assess the effectiveness of TMLR compared with medical management.

33 FU-1 and 2.4+/-1 at FU-2 (P=0.04 versus pre-TMLR).

34 Transmyocardial laser revascularisation (TMLR) is used to treat patients with refractory angina d

35 her transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) can lessen inducible ischemia and improve contract

36 Transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) has been proposed for treatment of refractory angi

37 ith transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) has reproducibly demonstrated an improvement in an

38 her transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) stimulates angiogenesis in an animal model of chro

39 nths, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery (TMLR) or initial assessment (medical management) we asse

40 However, the TMLR-treated dogs demonstrated an approximately 40% incr

41 Survival at 12 months was 89% (83-96) in the TMLR group and 96% (92-100) in the medical-management gr

42 le cells was about four times greater in the TMLR group than in the control group (p < 0.001).

43 s, was 40 s (95% CI -15 to 94) longer in the TMLR group than in the medical-management group at 12 mo

44 es greater in the myocardium surrounding the TMLR channel remnants than in control ischemic tissue (p

45 Of the 12 patients who underwent TMLR, DSE was repeated at 3 months postoperatively in 11