ライフサイエンスコーパス: elective

1 emergency 0.034; 95% CI = 0.027-0.041 versus elective 0.016; 95% CI = 0.009-0.023, P value for differ

2 1 males), 130235 (75.0%) were categorized as elective, 22592 (13.0%) as emergency, and 20816 (12.0%)

3 Hospital mortality was 2.9% (elective), 6.8% (in-hospital urgent), and 50% (emergency

4 Patients undergoing elective AAA repair between January 1, 2003, and Decembe

5 Thirty-day mortality in elective AAA repair dropped significantly from 6.3% in 2

6 Results: A total of 1540 patients underwent elective AAA repair during the study period.

7 lity and 44% in 3-year survival suggest that elective AAA repair is contraindicated in most severe CK

8 Mortality after elective AAA repair was primarily attributable to cardio

9 s by which we can improve outcomes following elective AAA repair, although patient referral to high-v

10 as resulted in a decrease of mortality after elective AAA repair, but results of open repair have imp

11 ngth of hospital stay in patients undergoing elective AAA repair.

12 rtality and morbidity in patients undergoing elective AAA repair.

13 nt predictor of postoperative outcomes after elective AAA repair.

14 ed with in-hospital mortality outcomes after elective AAA repair.

15 an adjunct to general anesthesia (GA) during elective AAA surgery is unknown.

16 sk Score (RFRS) with good predictability for elective abdominal and vascular patients to be used in t

17 upervised exercise program on outcomes after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.

18 cedure for postoperative pain control during elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery.

19 d trial was conducted on patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair through a midl

20 All patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, registered in

21 sed to identify adult patients who underwent elective abdominal surgery between June 2009 and Decembe

22 Consecutive older patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery with expected LOS longer than

23 nce and mesh-related complications following elective abdominal wall hernia repair in a population wi

24 Changes over time in elective abortions and in the cohort composition of high

25 percentage point increased probability of an elective admission (95% CI, 1.34 to 14.91; P = .019) com

26 scores, cost differences for emergent versus elective admission were calculated for each procedure.

27 Elective admissions were excluded.

28 Elective admissions were more common in hospitals with h

29 ] years), 81 (73%) were emergent vs 30 (27%) elective admissions.

30 Primary analyses included elective, adult, inpatient surgical procedures from Janu

31 atients may bias outcome comparisons between elective and emergency cases.

32 admission in urgent cases compared with both elective and emergency cases.

33 tment results have improved as well for both elective and emergency repair.

34 paedic, acute medicine, care of the elderly, elective and emergency surgery), located in four NHS hos

35 ortality between patients admitted following elective and emergency surgery.

36 evaluate how these changes have affected the elective and emergency treatment of AAA and their result

37 zed to the 2000 state census) of admissions, elective and emergency/urgent surgical and percutaneous

38 or inpatient mortality in patients with both elective and emergent admissions.

39 unstaffed licensed beds, and cancellation of elective and transfer admissions) was estimated at 57.7%

40 randomised trial done in patients undergoing elective and urgent percutaneous coronary intervention i

41 hospitalisations: change in slope for total, elective, and emergency hospitalisations were -0.2% (95%

42 Primary outcomes were: total, elective, and emergency hospitalisations, and total and

43 ent, which comprises a desirable outcome for elective aneurysm surgery, called "Textbook Outcome" (TO

44 evaluate the overall quality of the care of elective aneurysm surgery, which subsequently can be use

45 ectively analyzed in 109 patients undergoing elective angioplasty of right or circumflex coronary art

46 years and without aortic stenosis underwent elective aortic root surgery (AVS, n = 253; CVG with a b

47 ventilated patients immediately prior to an elective atrial septal defect repair procedure.

48 ensity-matched groups of patients undergoing elective BAV or TAVR were evaluated.

49 In propensity-matched patients undergoing elective BAV or TAVR, rates of in-hospital mortality (2.

50 ization model to find a rearrangement of the elective block schedule to smooth the average inpatient

51 r score = 0.058; 95% CI = 0.048-0.069 versus elective Brier score = 0.057; 95% CI = 0.044-0.07, P = 0

52 (5 to overweight or obese mothers) and 56 by elective C-section (26 to overweight or obese mothers).

53 magnitude of the association was larger for elective C-section (OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.70).

54 Our results suggest that delivery by elective C-section was associated with a higher risk of

55 d childhood ALL risk (<15 years of age), but elective C-section was associated with a significantly e

56 -statistic = 0.927; 95% CI = 0.921-0.932 and elective c-statistic = 0.887; 95% CI = 0.861-0.912, P =

57 he time of follow-up, only nine delivered by elective caesarean section.

58 trial tissues obtained from term, pre-labour elective Caesarean sections were exposed to receptor-ind

59 phylococcus aureus (MRSA) screening prior to elective cardiac or orthopedic procedures.

60 ients in sinus rhythm who were scheduled for elective cardiac surgery to receive perioperative rosuva

61 ive myocardial damage in patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery.

62 nderwent CCY at index admission (early CCY), elective CCY within 60 days of discharge (delayed CCY),

63 In contrast, among elective Cesarean deliveries, maternal body mass index w

64 the associations were strengthened only for elective cesarean delivery (aRR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.

65 risk ratio was 1.33 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.75) for elective cesarean delivery, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.22) fo

66 The increased risk of asthma associated with elective cesarean delivery, especially among children bo

67 ), induction (aRR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.21-1.40), elective cesarean section (aRR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.45-1.71)

68 obese (BMI >/= 30; n = 7) donors undergoing elective Cesarean section, we found that WJ MSC from obe

69 ergency cesarean section, and 9% by means of elective cesarean section.

70 0.99), whereas it was 2.2% versus 1.8% among elective cesareans (adjusted OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.8

71 In patients undergoing elective, clean contaminated colorectal surgery, the use

72 -alcohol (IPA) and chlorhexidine-alcohol for elective, clean-contaminated colorectal surgery.

73 Total annual costs for elective colectomies amounted to >$1.7 billion: 11.3% wa

74 Among elective colectomies, a focus of surgical quality-improv

75 total of 821 Medicare enrollees underwent an elective colectomy and met inclusion criteria.

76 Medicare enrollees undergoing an elective colectomy at a large tertiary care hospital bet

77 Elective colectomy increased from 7.9 to 17.2 per 100,00

78 al of patients with advanced UC treated with elective colectomy or medical therapy.

79 influence of these recommendations on use of elective colectomy or rates of emergency surgery remains

80 The elective colectomy rate for diverticulitis more than dou

81 Administration of MBP/OABP before elective colectomy reduces the incidence of SSI.

82 k factors for acute kidney injury undergoing elective colectomy to a minimum urine output target of 0

83 These trends do not support the practice of elective colectomy to prevent emergency surgery.

84 Combined MBP plus OABP before elective colectomy was associated with reduced SSI, whic

85 onsidered relevant to long-term treatment of elective colectomy, stratified differences in risk-adjus

86 for adult (>/=18 years) patients undergoing elective colectomy.

87 utilization and costs up to 1 year following elective colectomy.

88 Patients undergoing elective colon resection between January 1, 2012, and De

89 espite professional recommendations to delay elective colon resection for patients with uncomplicated

90 Current recommendations suggest avoiding elective colon resection for uncomplicated diverticuliti

91 A total of 26682 patients undergoing elective colon resection were included for analysis; 138

92 30-day clinical and economic outcomes after elective colon resection.

93 toperative complications with outcomes after elective colon resection.

94 llaborative (MSQC) of patients who underwent elective colon surgery from 2012 to 2015.

95 Among 69,303 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection (26% laparoscopic, 74% ope

96 included a total of 3768 patients undergoing elective colorectal resection (mean [SD] age, 62.7 [14.1

97 ng 2 target populations: patients undergoing elective colorectal resection and patients undergoing em

98 of an ERAS program among patients undergoing elective colorectal resection and patients undergoing em

99 onducted a prospective cohort study in adult elective colorectal resection patients after conventiona

100 For patients undergoing elective colorectal resection, the impact of preoperativ

101 Research Cooperative System was queried for elective colorectal resections in New York State from 20

102 Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) after elective colorectal surgery impact significantly the sho

103 Consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis were includ

104 s markers of intra-abdominal infection after elective colorectal surgery.

105 tool to ensure a safe early discharge after elective colorectal surgery.

106 rocalcitonin in the occurrence of IAIs after elective colorectal surgery.

107 ys 3 and 5 ensure safe early discharge after elective colorectal surgery.

108 surgical site infection (SSI) prevention in elective colorectal surgery.

109 rioperative team responsible for the care of elective colorectal surgical patients.

110 n patients from outside the service area for elective conditions compared with 179 (47.0%) at HBS (p<

111 tor and sFlt-1 in 791 HF patients undergoing elective coronary angiogram.

112 evidence of atherosclerotic CAD detected by elective coronary angiography between 2012 and 2014.

113 x regression in patients who were undergoing elective coronary angiography for suspected stable angin

114 y to atrial coronary branch occlusion during elective coronary angioplasty.

115 injury and improve patients' prognosis after elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

116 d total variable cost in patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft and valve surgerie

117 al Multicenter) registry, patients underwent elective coronary computed tomographic angiography for s

118 his study randomized 300 patients undergoing elective coronary stenting to loading with clopidogrel 6

119 Children delivered by both acute and elective CS had an increased risk of asthma, laryngitis,

120 eliac disease, whereas children delivered by elective CS had an increased risk of lower respiratory t

121 The effect of elective CS was higher than the effect of acute CS on th

122 function in children delivered by acute and elective CS with vaginal delivery as the reference were

123 rain injury, leading to high rates of repeat elective CS.

124 iscriminated between the effect of acute and elective CS.

125 mination between the effects of acute versus elective CS.

126 ts with an ejection fraction >35% undergoing elective diagnostic cardiac evaluation.

127 s with a history of heart failure undergoing elective diagnostic coronary angiography.

128 a difficulty feeding at the breast (FAB)] or elective (e.g., to produce HM to mix with solids).

129 gement of such a complication by means of an elective endovascular approach.

130 Patients undergoing major elective enhanced recovery colorectal surgery were ident

131 However, late mortality from elective EVAR is surprisingly high in comparison with op

132 When compared with the elective GA group, patients who underwent the procedure

133 d (2) elective intubation for the procedure (elective GA).

134 l patients included 5556 patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery and 1523 patients unde

135 gical comparator groups (patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery and emergency orthoped

136 queried to assess changes in wait times for elective general surgical procedures and clinical volume

137 t rollouts, mean (SD) patient wait times for elective general surgical procedures decreased from 33.4

138 residents rotating on our infectious disease elective have limited time to participate in rounds and

139 ommitment to include all patients undergoing elective hepatectomies in an observational study.

140 al syndrome (PHS) places patients undergoing elective hernia repair at increased risk for adverse pos

141 any inpatient admission within 90 days of an elective hernia repair performed in an ambulatory surger

142 Patients older than 18 years who underwent elective hernia repair were included.

143 January 2015), involving patients undergoing elective, high-risk cardiac surgery (ie, combined corona

144 Among patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty and treated with perio

145 ed 65 years or older initiating warfarin for elective hip or knee arthroplasty and was conducted at 6

146 -based nationwide cohort study including all elective incisional hernia repairs in Denmark from Janua

147 rt study of patients undergoing 1 of 6 major elective inpatient operation from 2002 to 2011 using the

148 nts were identified undergoing one of the 62 elective, inpatient operations.

149 model of surgically treated IH after 12,000 elective, intra-abdominal procedures to provide more ind

150 tients were categorized into (1) MAC and (2) elective intubation for the procedure (elective GA).

151 Legally capable adult patients accepted for elective isolated or combined aortic and mitral valve re

152 cessing of screening urine cultures prior to elective joint arthroplasty resulted in substantial redu

153 Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery were ran

154 Elective lead extraction for noninfectious indications h

155 se-derived adult stem cells were obtained by elective liposuction and cultured onto both sides of the

156 Median waiting time for an elective liver transplant was 4,4 months in 2015; high u

157 ntrolled trials of adult patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery comparing intraoperativ

158 viduals aged 65 years or older on the day of elective, major noncardiac surgery.

159 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02-0.08; P < .001) and were elective (n = 212; 70.9%; odds ratio, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03

160 th of stays, which might be explained by the elective nature of surgery and earlier tumor grades.

161 However, elective neck dissection comes with greater upfront cost

162 We present a cost-effectiveness analysis of elective neck dissection for the initial surgical manage

163 rvival advantage among patients who received elective neck dissection in conjunction with primary sur

164 clusion Our study found that the addition of elective neck dissection reduces costs and improves heal

165 l found that over a lifetime the addition of elective neck dissection to primary surgery reduced over

166 nsitivity analysis found that treatment with elective neck dissection was cost effective 76% of the t

167 response after chemoradiation do not require elective neck dissection.

168 may be beneficial for BBB protection during elective neurosurgeries.

169 going percutaneous coronary intervention for elective, non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction

170 lderly (>68 years) patients undergoing major elective noncardiac surgery.

171 airs medical center who presented for major, elective, noncardiac surgery from October 1, 2007, to Ju

172 amined inpatient data of patients undergoing elective OAR or CEA from 2000 to 2014 from all New York

173 Retrospective cohort study of elective ODP and MIDP performed at 106 centers in 2014,

174 The review included all patients undergoing elective open AAA repair (OAR) or endovascular AAA repai

175 nd cost-effectiveness did not differ between elective open and endovascular repair of AAA.

176 of the similarity in clinical outcomes after elective open and endovascular repair of abdominal aorti

177 compare actual 90-day hospital costs between elective open and laparoscopic colon and rectal cancer r

178 ient was managed conservatively, followed by elective open cholecystectomy and excision of the fistul

179 Patients over 18 years of age scheduled for elective open lobectomy or bilobectomy for malignancy we

180 Patients over 18 years of age scheduled for elective open lobectomy or bilobectomy for malignancy we

181 erative complications in patients undergoing elective, open AAA repair.

182 Although complex, elective operations performed at safety-net hospitals ha

183 MPION PHOENIX) trials of patients undergoing elective or nonelective PCI.

184 ren from birth to 15 years of age undergoing elective or urgent anaesthesia for diagnostic or surgica

185 trial randomized 11,145 patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention to

186 awaiting a renal transplantation, undergoing elective orthopedic surgery requiring a small-volume bon

187 Four patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery served as controls.

188 rating theatres in 5 UK hospitals performing elective orthopedic, plastic, or vascular surgery PARTIC

189 AP) and children asymptomatic at the time of elective outpatient surgery (controls) were enrolled.

190 Postoperative mortality did not differ for elective (P = .78) or emergent (P = .31) surgeries when

191 eened to identify all adult patients who had elective pancreatectomies between 2007 and 2012.

192 ratifying patients according to the need for elective partial colectomy.

193 GDFT may not be of benefit to all elective patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, pa

194 In all, 56,942 emergency and 136,311 elective patients were identified as having a common CPT

195 r extubation (18.3% of emergency and 4.9% of elective patients) and confirmed by specialists within 2

196 a 1:1 matched sample of 37,154 emergency and elective patients, the O:E ratios generated by ACS-NSQIP

197 (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.05; P = .66), and elective PCI (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.84-1.03; P = .17).

198 value of post-procedural hs-TnT level after elective PCI depends on the baseline hs-TnT level.

199 Among 1080 elective PCI patients (mean age, 65 years; 74.7% men), 3

200 A total of 800 patients undergoing elective PCI via the femoral approach were included.

201 his study included 5,626 patients undergoing elective PCI who had baseline and peak post-procedural h

202 gina before and at 1, 6, and 12 months after elective PCI with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire angin

203 ents with coronary artery disease undergoing elective PCI, an increase in post-procedural hs-TnT leve

204 n diabetic versus nondiabetic patients after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has no

205 sitivity troponin T (hs-TnT) elevation after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in pat

206 ed in one fourth of SCAD patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention.

207 -cTnT) elevation in SCAD patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary interventions is not well

208 ndergoing interventional reperfusion of AMI, elective percutaneous or surgical coronary revasculariza

209 nical outcomes of all US patients undergoing elective percutaneous transfemoral TAVR between April 1,

210 tive atrial coronary artery occlusion during elective percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty

211 confidence interval (CI) = 1.028-1.033] and elective populations (O:E = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.77-0.80, P

212 aking appear to differ between emergency and elective populations.

213 ided by surgeons who do not have traditional elective practices.

214 we identified 91,963 patients, who underwent elective primary and revisional bariatric surgery betwee

215 In-hospital mortality was 1.7% for elective procedures but significantly higher for nonelec

216 Adults undergoing 25 common elective procedures from 2013 to 2015 were identified fr

217 ateness rate for PCIs and the use of PCI for elective procedures in New York has decreased substantia

218 midnight on the outcomes of their scheduled elective procedures performed during the day.

219 3; P = .62) for acute coronary syndromes and elective procedures requiring inpatient hospitalization.

220 Compared with mothers who pumped for elective reasons, mothers who reported one nonelective r

221 42 children enrolled in the Pediatric Eczema Elective Registry who provided saliva samples for DNA ex

222 Elective repair improves hernia-related QoL and function

223 ial enrolled 881 patients undergoing planned elective repair of AAA who were candidates for open and

224 he use of EVAR became the dominant method of elective repair.

225 lack of a telephone, or contraindications to elective replacement surgery.

226 -added surgical care, factors driving early, elective resection for diverticulitis need to be determi

227 nonimmunocompromised patients who underwent elective resection for uncomplicated diverticulitis, of

228 In patients undergoing elective resection of colon cancer (n = 575), 5-year CSS

229 All elective resections for a T1-3N0-2M0 stage colorectal ca

230 verticulitis claims, 56.3% (1720 of 3054) of elective resections for uncomplicated diverticulitis occ

231 In 2012, 47.5% of elective resections were performed laparoscopically comp

232 Clinically indicated elective revascularizations performed within 45 days aft

233 core emergency surgical cases also common to elective scenarios (gastrointestinal, vascular, and hepa

234 An elective scheduling surgery, instead of an urgent repair

235 postoperative mortality compared with OR in elective setting in patients with nonlocally advanced, n

236 rgery, for malignant colorectal diseases, in elective setting.

237 opidogrel-Induced Platelet Inhibition During Elective Stent Implantation on Clinical Event Rate-Advan

238 apy for reducing perioperative hemorrhage in elective surgeries.

239 ics may improve the safety and efficiency of elective surgery among chronic opioid users.

240 To describe functional recovery after elective surgery and to determine whether improvements d

241 This may reflect changes in thresholds for elective surgery and/or an increase in the frequency or

242 Patients hospitalized within 90 days of an elective surgery are at increased risk of adverse events

243 ment Program preoperative risk factors, with elective surgery as the reference value, the 3 groups ha

244 rative frailty in all patients scheduled for elective surgery began in July 2011.

245 e observational study in patients undergoing elective surgery for colon cancer without mechanical bow

246 tabase contained 625 patients that underwent elective surgery for descending thoracic aortic aneurysm

247 In patients undergoing elective surgery for nonlocally advanced, nonmetastasize

248 r were assessed in a preoperative clinic for elective surgery from July 9, 2008, to January 5, 2011.

249 all esophageal cancer patients who underwent elective surgery in Sweden in 1987 to 2010, with follow-

250 influences postoperative outcomes following elective surgery is not well understood.

251 es have been reported in patients undergoing elective surgery later compared with earlier in the week

252 occupancy across the days of the week due to elective surgery scheduling practices.

253 The Successful Aging after Elective Surgery study enrolled dementia-free adults >/=

254 from the prospective Successful Aging after Elective Surgery study were analysed blind to the clinic

255 Patients undergoing major elective surgery were assessed daily while in hospital f

256 r auxological evaluation or obesity or minor elective surgery were prospectively enrolled.

257 specific, as they reduce infection rates in elective surgery, but possibly increase morbidity in cri

258 aseline characteristics (ICU admission after elective surgery, emergency surgery, or medical admissio

259 Patients over 45 years old undergoing elective surgery, involving the gastrointestinal tract,

260 In elective surgery, it is well documented that a midline l

261 As greater numbers of older patients seek elective surgery, one approach to preventing postoperati

262 Before elective surgery, they had a mean (SD) of 1.0 (0.9) inpa

263 atients presenting to the medical center for elective surgery.

264 SUMMARY OF IPLA reduces pain in adult elective surgery.

265 ncreases the risk of complications following elective surgery.

266 female subjects and half were admitted after elective surgery.

267 help to maximize the functional benefits of elective surgery.

268 the trial, which included both emergency and elective surgery.

269 the trajectory of functional recovery after elective surgery.

270 rgery, and reason for hospitalization before elective surgery.

271 surgery than in patients admitted following "elective" surgery.

272 ere were 81 recurrences and 50 deaths in the elective-surgery group and 146 recurrences and 79 deaths

273 of adverse events were 6.6% and 3.6% in the elective-surgery group and the therapeutic-surgery group

274 ibed for risk stratification, but few target elective surgical candidates.

275 In-hospital mortality after elective surgical lung biopsy for interstitial lung dise

276 relevant non-major bleeding events) required elective surgical or interventional treatment (hysterect

277 phosphate oxidase subunit-2-deficient mice; elective surgical patients.

278 Cases included all patients undergoing elective surgical procedures at Mayo Clinic, Rochester,

279 cal Quality Improvement Program investigated elective surgical procedures from January 2011 to Decemb

280 n may help to address inequity in the use of elective surgical procedures, such as IPBR.

281 urgical outcomes and increased cost across 9 elective surgical procedures.

282 h healthcare utilization and costs following elective surgical procedures.

283 s associated with the highest SSI rate among elective surgical procedures.

284 n disparities in health care, especially for elective surgical procedures.

285 f 763 patients diagnosed with CRC undergoing elective surgical resection between 2006 and 2013 were i

286 ty, and effectiveness of these 2 methods for elective surgical treatment of large hiatal hernias.

287 th chronic pancreatitis who were planned for elective surgical treatment were randomly assigned to DP

288 t across various patient subtypes (89.3% for electives surgical patients up to 94.8% for trauma patie

289 tcome measures include rates of live births, elective terminations, stillbirths, and congenital anoma

290 ischarge and 669 patients (0.18%) died after elective THR.

291 (1.82% for hip fracture surgery vs 0.31% for elective THR; absolute risk increase, 1.51% [95% CI, 1.4

292 (5.88% for hip fracture surgery vs 2.34% for elective THR; absolute risk increase, 3.54% [95% CI, 3.5

293 e and time of admission, and admission type (elective, transfer, or unplanned).

294 Elective umbilical hernia repair with mesh should be con

295 , Elixhauser comorbidities), admission type (elective, urgent, emergency), and type of operation.

296 cation status I or II), and having undergone elective, urgent, or emergent caesarian section under sp

297 Elective VHR was not recommended for patients with BMI >

298 Elective VHR was not recommended for patients with BMI >

299 a were available on type of C-section (i.e., elective vs. emergency) for a subset of 1,552 cases and

300 The complex elective workload of HV esophageal cancer surgeons appea