ライフサイエンスコーパス: euglycemic

1 g/kg/min), separated by a 120-min break (all euglycemic).

2 mediators and NO were measured under clamped euglycemic (4-6 mmol/L) and hyperglycemic (9-11 mmol/L)

3 two 2-h hyperinsulinemic (812 +/- 50 pmol/L)-euglycemic (5 +/- 0.1 mmol/L) or hyperinsulinemic (812 +

4 ous pathways under hyperglycemic (26 mm) and euglycemic (5 mm) conditions.

5 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic (5 mmol/L) and hypoglycemic (3 mmol/L) [1-(13

6 functional magnetic resonance imaging during euglycemic (5.0 mmol/L) and hypoglycemic (2.8 mmol/L) hy

7 d monocytes obtained during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic (5.0 mmol/L)-hypoglycemic (2.6 mmol/L) clamps

8 bjects underwent a two-step hyperinsulinemic euglycemic (5.0 mmol/L)-hypoglycemic (2.8 mmol/L) glucos

9 Day 1 involved hyperinsulinemic euglycemic (90 mg/dL x 1 h), then hypoglycemic (54 mg/dL

10 ic participants underwent a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic (92+/-3 mg/dL) - hypoglycemic (53+/-1 mg/dL)

11 We determined the effects of three different euglycemic agents on HD progression using standard physi

12 Euglycemic agents targeting hypothalamic and energy regu

13 orated, to varying degrees, by the different euglycemic agents.

14 in, lipid measurements, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic and hyperglycemic clamp experiments were perf

15 ssed glucose homeostasis by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic and hyperglycemic clamp studies and energy ex

16 ed metabolic cages, glucose tolerance tests, euglycemic and hyperglycemic clamps, as well as isolated

17 T1D patients (n = 49) were studied under euglycemic and hyperglycemic conditions at baseline and

18 olated with laser-capture microdissection in euglycemic and hyperglycemic HypoE mice.

19 ng (CGM) values, percentage of CGM values in euglycemic and hyperglycemic ranges, and mean amplitude

20 Day 2 involved similar morning euglycemic and hypoglycemic clamps, with saline infusion

21 e brain glycogen metabolism during and after euglycemic and hypoglycemic clamps.

22 d by antecedent recurrent hypoglycemia under euglycemic and hypoglycemic conditions in a rat model an

23 A, was not significantly different comparing euglycemic and hypoglycemic conditions in patients with

24 For this purpose, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic and hypoglycemic glucose clamps were performe

25 scular adhesion and augment atherogenesis in euglycemic apolipoprotein E knockout mice to a similar m

26 ate in the BD + IR/GI, and highest among the euglycemic BD and control subjects (F(3),(5)(5) = 4.57,

27 I), 14 BD subjects with T2DM (BD + T2DM), 15 euglycemic BD participants, and 11 euglycemic, nonpsychi

28 (IS; n = 10), determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (>30% greater in IS compared with IR, P

29 infusion (3 h), insulin was increased with a euglycemic clamp (3 mU x min(-1) x kg(-1)), and hindlimb

30 s measured by a three-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (4, 8, and 40 mU/m(2)/min) in 87 subjec

31 /- 9.7 mg/dl) than during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (95.3 +/- 3.3 mg/dl), indicating mobili

32 maging system combined with hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp (HEC) was used.

33 tients underwent a two-step hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (HEC) with glucose tracer and labeled g

34 ous glucose tolerance test (four cohorts) or euglycemic clamp (three cohorts), and random-effects mod

35 ma Indians (P = 0.027) or a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp among 536 nondiabetic Native Americans

36 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis 8 weeks after lesioning showed

37 emale mice were assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis and indirect calorimetry and b

38 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp analysis was used to analyze the role o

39 n type 1 diabetes using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and (31)P-MRS before, during, and after

40 ion were evaluated by a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a 2-h hyperglycemic clamp.

41 Assessments by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and a glucose tolerance test revealed n

42 ured GDR, fasting glucose, and FFAs during a euglycemic clamp and adipose tissue mass and distributio

43 d of each dietary period, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and an intravenous glucose tolerance te

44 ntain euglycemia during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and could entirely be attributed to inc

45 sensitivity was measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and insulin secretion by applying mathe

46 and glucose tolerance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and intravenous and oral glucose tolera

47 d insulin sensitivity using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp and muscle insulin receptor substrate a

48 h a 40-mU x m(-2) x min(-1) hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp combined with a [6,6-(2)H(2)]-glucose i

49 ty were assessed using the hyperinsulinemic- euglycemic clamp combined with the glucose tracer techni

50 hly insulin sensitive under hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp conditions, eliminating insulin insensi

51 erol, in combination with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp during the last 3 hrs.

52 The hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiment showed that the TRPV1 KO mic

53 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiments show, for the first time, t

54 Yet in insulin tolerance tests and euglycemic clamp experiments, NTE-1 did not enhance insu

55 nsulin tolerance tests, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp experiments.

56 < 0.05) and negatively with hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp glucose infusion rate (r = -0.28, P < 0

57 abolism, as assessed during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp in awake mice.

58 nfusion of insulin during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp induced conspicuous ER stress in the 3-

59 ensitivity, measured by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp method.

60 During hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp of diabetic KKA(Y) mice, A(2B)R antagon

61 ect measures of insulin sensitivity, such as euglycemic clamp or insulin suppression test, in 2,764 E

62 legs before and after a 3-h hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp performed 3 h after a 45-min, one-legge

63 sal conditions and during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure (HECP), with and without conc

64 was evaluated by using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure in conjunction with stable is

65 A two-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure in conjunction with stable is

66 hr308) in 22 women during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure with and without concomitant

67 in glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure).

68 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure, in conjunction with glucose

69 was determined by using the hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp procedure.

70 ene expression analyses and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp results suggest that CAR activation ame

71 The hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp revealed that hepatic insulin sensitivi

72 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp reveals an increased glucose infusion r

73 Hyperglycemic-euglycemic clamp studies and glucose tolerance testing r

74 learance were quantified by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies and pyruvate tolerance tests.

75 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies demonstrated that targeted disr

76 yruvate tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies established increased insulin s

77 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies indicate that in contrast to he

78 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies reveal that the maintenance of

79 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed a dramatically improve

80 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed greater high-fat diet-

81 However, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies revealed improved insulin sensi

82 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed significantly improved

83 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that Grp78 heterozygos

84 sis on a high-fat diet, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies revealed that insulin sensitivi

85 Furthermore, hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies showed no difference between Pr

86 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies showed that adiponectin adminis

87 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies showed that the increase in hep

88 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies suggest that DM199 increases wh

89 insulin tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies were performed with heterozygou

90 harvested before and after hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, at baseline and after 3-month

91 In hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, Pctp(-/-) mice exhibited profo

92 insulin sensitivity during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies, which was associated with incr

93 ic subjects was assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

94 insulin sensitivity during hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp studies.

95 sitivity were determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

96 and glucose levels through hyperinsulinemic, euglycemic clamp studies.

97 abolism was investigated by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies.

98 A hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp study was performed to assess the abili

99 high exogenous insulin over the course of a euglycemic clamp study, indicating that hypoinsulinemia

100 In addition, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp suggests that intracerebroventricular d

101 nsitivity measured with the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique and with plasma tumor necrosi

102 t was assessed by using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique.

103 n with isotope dilution and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp techniques.

104 reased more than 30% in the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp test.

105 t we believe to be a novel hyperglucagonemic-euglycemic clamp to isolate an increment in glucagon lev

106 was administered and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was commenced ("fed" period).

107 cose infusion rate during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was increased by 50% in high-fat diet-f

108 Insulin sensitivity during euglycemic clamp was increased, whereas total body fat m

109 Wistar rats assessed by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was minimally affected by pioglitazone

110 During the last 2 h, a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was performed.

111 A hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp was used to compare tissue-specific cha

112 ensitivity (measured with a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with [6,6-(2)H(2)]-glucose), and oral g

113 nsitivity was assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with [6,6-(2)H2]-glucose infusion.

114 insulin sensitivity using a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp with a glucose isotope tracer before an

115 hed Cs underwent a two-step hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with skeletal muscle biopsies and indir

116 nsitivity (assessed using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with stable isotope tracer infusion) in

117 raded glucose infusion, and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp with stable-isotope-labeled tracer infu

118 glucose tolerance test and hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp) and imaging studies (MRI, DEXA, (1)H-N

119 (LPB) under postabsorptive (hypoinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp) and postprandial (hyperinsulinemic hyp

120 randial (hyperinsulinemic hyperaminoacidemic-euglycemic clamp) conditions.

121 = 64] or insulin-resistant [IR] [n = 79] by euglycemic clamp) received four mixed meals over 14 h wi

122 ithout insulin stimulation (hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp) using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose scanning

123 er and insulin sensitivity (hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp) were performed before and after the tr

124 on insulin sensitivity (by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp), body composition (by dual-energy X-ra

125 ol at baseline and during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp), lipid oxidation (indirect calorimetry

126 of insulin sensitivity (3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp), substrate oxidation (indirect calorim

127 nsitivity was measured by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, and skeletal muscle mitochondrial ATP

128 sensitivity, as measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, and skeletal muscle mitochondrial func

129 nthropometric measures, FFAs, IR measured by euglycemic clamp, blood pressure, fasting serum lipids,

130 During the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, retrodialysis of dexamethasone into th

131 n sensitive, as measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, than C57BL/6 wild-type mice.

132 ontrols (n = 6) underwent a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, VO2max test, dual-energy X-ray absorpt

133 Using the hyperglycemic and euglycemic clamp, we demonstrated impaired beta-cell fun

134 in resistance assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, which could mostly be attributed to in

135 g glucose disposal during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp, while decreasing hepatic glucose produ

136 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

137 ucose production during the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

138 nd increased rate of glucose disposal during euglycemic clamp.

139 sensitivity measured by the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

140 5-h basal period and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

141 3-h basal period and a 3-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

142 ween a baseline study and a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp.

143 system was performed under hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

144 uscles at the baseline of a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

145 esistance was assessed by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

146 metabolism was evaluated by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

147 f glucose infusion during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

148 -deoxyglucose uptake during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

149 c glucose production during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

150 that of the WT mice in the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

151 levels (near basal, 4x, or 16x) during a 5-h euglycemic clamp.

152 Insulin sensitivity was determined by euglycemic clamp.

153 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

154 ose uptake as measured by a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

155 ric characteristics and were studied using a euglycemic clamp.

156 cle glucose uptake during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

157 tivity was measured using a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp.

158 rin-infusion (high FFA) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping (low FFA) in a randomized crossover-

159 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping studies revealed that ECSHIP2(Delta/

160 udies comparing fasting and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping with tracer infusions.

161 s confirmed with the use of hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamping, showing a glucose infusion rate amo

162 nd in wild-type mice during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping.

163 istration of tracers during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping.

164 yperinsulinemic- (9 pmol x kg(-1) x min(-1)) euglycemic clamps (5.1 mmol/l), hypoglycemic clamps (2.9

165 rom liver insulin resistance, as revealed by euglycemic clamps and hepatic insulin signaling determin

166 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and insulin tolerance testing showed s

167 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and signaling studies were performed f

168 t research tests, including hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps and vastus lateralis biopsies.

169 e treatment, mice underwent hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps combined with radiolabeled glucose to

170 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps confirmed enhanced insulin sensitivity

171 tivity was determined using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in conscious mice.

172 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in DIO mice revealed that MTZ increase

173 tolerance tests (GTTs) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps in mouse models of type 2 diabetes.

174 ion in IR was studied using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps on integrin alpha(2)beta(1)-null (itga

175 he following: 1) two 90-min hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps plus naloxone infusion (control); 2) t

176 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps revealed no differences in insulin sen

177 of insulin resistance using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps revealed no significant differences in

178 We used hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps to show a bona fide circadian rhythm o

179 to assess IMCL content and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps using [6,6-(2)H(2)] glucose to assess

180 and insulin sensitivity by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were examined.

181 At the end of the study, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were performed and skeletal muscle (va

182 Basal insulin (0.2 mU x min(-1) x kg(-1)) euglycemic clamps were performed on fat-fed animals (n =

183 e-tolerance test (OGTT) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were performed to assess beta-cell fun

184 Hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamps were performed to determine whole-body

185 -ribofuranoside (AICAR; 8 mg.kg(-1).min(-1))-euglycemic clamps were performed to elicit an increase i

186 Hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were used to assess insulin sensitivit

187 ethionine restriction (MR), hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps were used to examine the effect of the

188 insulin administration and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with [(3)H]glucose infusion.

189 mol/l), hypoglycemic clamps (2.9 mmol/l), or euglycemic clamps with a physiologic low-dose intravenou

190 First, we performed hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with concurrent hippocampal microdialy

191 wenty-one men underwent two hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with d-[6,6-(2)H2]glucose infusion to

192 on (control); 2) two 90-min hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with exercise at 60% Vo(2max), plus na

193 mic-hypoglycemic and paired hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with infusion of 6,6-(2)H2-glucose and

194 ctroscopy before and during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps with isotope dilution.

195 Conscious dogs underwent euglycemic clamps with tracer and hepatic balance measur

196 ), insulin sensitivity (via hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps), and insulin secretion [via intraveno

197 sing direct measures (i.e., hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps), we examined the relationships betwee

198 disposal rate (measured by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps).

199 utilization (determined by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps).

200 nd insulin tolerance tests, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, and insulin signaling studies.

201 on in isolated hepatocytes, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, liver triglyceride content, and liver

202 Using hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps, we studied insulin action in Liv-DGAT

203 insulin tolerance tests and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

204 e tolerance test and during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

205 sensitivity was analyzed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

206 K)-DGAT1 transgenic mice by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

207 s and glycogenolysis during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

208 as assessed with the use of hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamps.

209 g protocols: [2-(13)C]acetate infusion under euglycemic conditions (n = 8), [1-(13)C]glucose and unla

210 ucose and unlabeled acetate coinfusion under euglycemic conditions (n = 8), and [2-(13)C]acetate infu

211 Under euglycemic conditions glutamine uptake doubled, but ATP

212 During hypoglycemia, compared with baseline euglycemic conditions, 1) baroreflex sensitivity decreas

213 aits of tumor growth, even after a return to euglycemic conditions.

214 but there is increasing evidence that tight euglycemic control is associated with detrimental outcom

215 Tight euglycemic control was rapidly implemented in intensive

216 prazolam or day 1 hypoglycemia compared with euglycemic control.

217 Day 2 consisted of 90-min euglycemic cycling exercise at 50% Vo(2max).

218 Day 2 consisted of a 90-min euglycemic cycling exercise at 50% VO2max Tritiated gluc

219 Day 2 consisted of 90-min euglycemic cycling exercise at 50% VO2max.

220 e evaluated cardiovascular function in young euglycemic Dpp4(-/-) mice and in older, high fat-fed, di

221 Young euglycemic Dpp4(-/-) mice exhibited a cardioprotective r

222 Taken together, these euglycemic effects of salidroside may due to repression

223 anhydrase II (CAII)(Cre);Pdx1(Fl) mice were euglycemic for the first 2 postnatal weeks but showed mo

224 sensitivity was assessed by hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic glucose clamp before and after intranasal app

225 er 22-54 h after undergoing hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic (glucose concentration 92.4 +/- 2.3 mg/dl) an

226 hyperinsulinemic- (2 mU x kg(-1) x min(-1)) euglycemic- (glucose approximately 5.5 mmol/l) hypoglyce

227 >/=2 of the following: tubular proteinuria, euglycemic glycosuria, increased urinary phosphate, and

228 Hyperglycemic (HG) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic (HI) clamps were performed to assess GSIS and

229 Insulin sensitivity was assessed with euglycemic-hyperinsulemic clamps.

230 at in 10 and 11 adults, respectively, during euglycemic hyperinsulinemia or after oral niacin to supp

231 study with [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose during euglycemic hyperinsulinemia.

232 ere studied before and 1 month after RYGB by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC), by intravenous

233 ; P = 0.21), or glucose disposal rates under euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp conditions (SMD: 0.00;

234 seline and 2 weeks after treatment using the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp technique.

235 ty in liver, muscle, and adipose tissue by a euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp with 3-(3)H-glucose.

236 educed insulin resistance, measured with the euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp, along with the ratio

237 nd hepatic glucose production as assessed by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp.

238 Euglycemic, hyperinsulinemic clamp studies indicated RYG

239 SI was measured using euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (EGC), before (week 0

240 Euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC) was preformed to

241 by isotope dilution, insulin sensitivity by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (steady-state glucose

242 Here we show that initiation of a euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp 4 h after single-legge

243 A euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp and skeletal muscle bi

244 is of glucose homeostasis was assessed using euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp coupled with tracer ra

245 A euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp procedure and stable i

246 Stable isotope tracer techniques and the euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp procedure were used to

247 Euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp studies confirmed the

248 Euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp studies demonstrate th

249 re assessed before (basal period) and during euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp studies.

250 entions, we conducted a meal challenge and a euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp to evaluate insulin se

251 extensor digitorum longus muscle during the euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp was increased in lean

252 , whole-body and muscle insulin sensitivity (euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp with 2-deoxyglucose) a

253 glucose metabolism (insulin tolerance test, euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, and hepatic expressio

254 ripheral insulin sensitivity was analyzed by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, and molecular tools w

255 A euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, muscle biopsy specime

256 Thirty patients at risk for CIM underwent euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, muscle microdialysis

257 During euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp, there is no suppressi

258 gated the association of genetic scores with euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp- and oral glucose tole

259 insulin sensitivity was quantitated with the euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp.

260 travenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp.

261 lucose production is impaired as assessed by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp.

262 Subjects were also studied by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps performed at rest and

263 3.6 years) pre- and 3 months post-RYGB, and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps were used to assess i

264 on insulin sensitivity, as measured by using euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps with infusion of [6,6

265 edly enhanced glucose uptake measured during euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps, suggesting a role of

266 alysis with oral glucose tolerance tests and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps.

267 y, and determined systemic glucose uptake by euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic glucose clamp in 15 normal-w

268 atic insulin resistance, as verified using a euglycemic/hyperinsulinemic clamp.

269 Glucose metabolism was not stimulated during euglycemic-hyperinsulinergic clamp.

270 RI) combined with a stepped hyperinsulinemic euglycemic-hypoglycemic clamp and behavioral measures of

271 A 2-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic insulin clamp was used to measure insulin sen

272 insulin sensitivity, were assessed during a euglycemic insulin clamp with 3-[(3) H] glucose.

273 with the following studies: liver (1) H-MRS; euglycemic insulin clamp with measurement of glucose tur

274 se and 11 T2DM subjects received 1) OGTT, 2) euglycemic insulin clamp with muscle biopsy, and 3) (1)H

275 sensitivity (M/I ratio) was measured by the euglycemic insulin clamp.

276 ed an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and euglycemic insulin clamp.

277 ody insulin clearance were measured during a euglycemic insulin clamp.

278 sting conditions and separately during a 6-h euglycemic insulin infusion at 40 mU . m(-2) . min(-1).

279 The IPGR group remained lean, euglycemic, insulin sensitive, and active while maintain

280 nd visceral fat (P < 0.0002) while remaining euglycemic, insulin sensitive, inactive, and exhibiting

281 cose increased from moderate hypoglycemia to euglycemic levels, whereas ERG b-wave sensitivity improv

282 hen plasma glucose concentrations rise above euglycemic levels.

283 T2DM), 15 euglycemic BD participants, and 11 euglycemic, nonpsychiatric control.

284 11beta-HSD1 activity is sustained, unlike in euglycemic obesity.

285 n insulin-independent patients, partial when euglycemic on once-daily long-acting insulin (all tested

286 Day 1 consisted of morning and afternoon 2-h euglycemic or 2.9 mmol/L hypoglycemic clamps with or wit

287 rylation by autocrine IGF-1 occur equally in euglycemic or hyperglycemic conditions, suggesting that

288 f morning and afternoon 2-h hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic or hypoglycemic clamps with or without 1 mg a

289 nd insulin sensitivity were performed during euglycemic pancreatic clamp studies following diazoxide

290 Rats were studied by euglycemic pancreatic clamps and concomitant infusion of

291 e BD + IR/GI subjects had lower NAA than the euglycemic participants (t(4)(3) = 2.13, p = .04).

292 arly all islet-KC mice (n = 15 of 16) became euglycemic posttransplant.

293 ucose, but subjects remained well within the euglycemic range.

294 riability and mortality was strongest in the euglycemic range.

295 glucose or 5-thio-D-glucose in anesthetized, euglycemic rats.

296 ased RAGE expression in T cells from at-risk euglycemic relatives who progress to T1D compared with h

297 recovery phase was allowed to reestablish a euglycemic state.

298 significant glucose lowering was observed in euglycemic subjects, a modest improvement was observed i

299 owever, the vast majority of carriers remain euglycemic through middle age.

300 vels are similarly regulated by a shift from euglycemic to hyperglycemic conditions.