ライフサイエンスコーパス: femoris

1 o, p = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.075-1.565, in rectus femoris).

2 vastus medialis, vastus lateralis and rectus femoris).

3 l gastrocnemius, vastus lateralis and biceps femoris).

4 ial gastrocnemius, rectus femoris and biceps femoris).

5 re recorded in biceps brachii and quadriceps femoris.

6 by the plegic leg and abnormal early rectus femoris activity, was exacerbated at the most vertical b

7 the Semimembranosus, Semitendinosus, Rectus femoris and Biceps femoris muscles of the hams was compu

8 The rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscles showed no clear refle

9 itional indicators in Semitendinosus, Rectus femoris and Biceps femoris muscles.

10 ialis anterior, medial gastrocnemius, rectus femoris and biceps femoris).

11 o record BP, ECG, respiration, EMG of rectus femoris and gastrocnemius and contraction force of trice

12 ts potential for discrimination among biceps femoris and semimembranosus muscle from two hams, differ

13 The results obtained in Biceps femoris and Semimembranosus muscles showed that 52% and

14 tiation and early termination) in the rectus femoris and semimembranosus.

15 nd semimembranosus (SM) and conjoined biceps femoris and semitendinosus (BF-ST) tendons and evaluated

16 By 36 months, vastus lateralis, rectus femoris and soleus muscles, from AL-fed rats, had signif

17 Rectus femoris and vastus lateralis muscle fibers were analyzed

18 uated in the Semimembranosus (SM) and Biceps femoris (BF) muscles of pork legs for compositional and

19 with age in the vastus lateralis and rectus femoris but not the soleus of AL-fed rats.

20 serial ultrasound measurement of the rectus femoris cross-sectional area (CSA) on days 1, 3, 7, and

21 iagnosed by ultrasound measurement of rectus femoris cross-sectional area.

22 , 4.53-33.77; P < 0.001), quadriceps (rectus femoris) cross-sectional area (Qcsa) (OR, 0.34; 95% CI,

23 surement methods on days 1 and 7, the rectus femoris CSA decreased by 10.3% (95% CI, 6.1% to 14.5%),

24 re were significant reductions in the rectus femoris CSA observed at day 10 (-17.7% [95% CI, -25.9% t

25 Decrease in the rectus femoris CSA was greater in patients who experienced mult

26 pecimens and ultrasound assessment of Rectus Femoris echogenicity.

27 Thus, rectus femoris in the impaired leg was active during finger fle

28 all the muscles examined, the VL and biceps femoris long head were the most responsive to disease pr

29 the biceps femoris, vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, medial gastrocnemius, soleus, tibialis anterior

30 nificantly increased (P < .05) in the biceps femoris muscle 2 days after running.

31 associated with abnormalities in quadriceps femoris muscle and ipsilaterally reduced distance betwee

32 differences in elastic modulus of the rectus femoris muscle and patellar tendon were found with diffe

33 Quadriceps femoris muscle fibers from affected cats appeared smalle

34 We examined 82,713 rectus femoris muscle fibers from Fischer 344 x Brown Norway F1

35 try, resistance to fatigue of the quadriceps femoris muscle group and biopsy of the vastus lateralis

36 Between 5 and 38 months of age, the rectus femoris muscle in the hybrid rat demonstrated a 33% decr

37 We found, in biceps femoris muscle, decreased Akt(Ser473), FOXO1(Ser253) and

38 ated on myofibrils prepared from pork rectus femoris muscle.

39 s, Semitendinosus, Rectus femoris and Biceps femoris muscles of the hams was computed and expressed i

40 The rectus femoris and biceps femoris muscles showed no clear reflex activity with thi

41 gastrocnemius, vastus lateralis, and rectus femoris muscles were evaluated in the healthy cohort.

42 in Semitendinosus, Rectus femoris and Biceps femoris muscles.

43 e reflex withdrawal recorded from the biceps femoris of the stimulated leg.

44 r with compression (P < .001) for the rectus femoris only.

45 Two hundred biceps femoris porcine muscle samples from Spanish dry-cured ha

46 were implanted into vastus lateralis, biceps femoris posterior, lateral gastrocnemius and tibialis an

47 mstrings (MH), vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris (RF) and iliopsoas (ILIO); the hip, knee and ank

48 n of erector spinae, gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, soleus and intrinsic foot (toe flexor) muscles.

49 rmal fibers in the entire 5-month-old rectus femoris to 1094 +/- 126 in the 38-month-old as calculate

50 elicited responses bilaterally in the biceps femoris, vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, medial gastro

51 Femoral bone and Rectus femoris Volumes (RFVOL) were determined by magnetic reso

52 Adductor longus and/or rectus femoris, whose involvement can go clinically undetected,