ライフサイエンスコーパス: intestinal transplant

1 ischemia without imposing constraints on the intestinal transplant.

2 en for liver-intestine, and two for isolated intestinal transplant.

3 itric oxide synthase rapidly increased after intestinal transplant.

4 mortality for those on the waiting list for intestinal transplants.

5 ed parenteral nutrition received 28 isolated intestinal transplants.

6 ts on the hemodynamics and function of small intestinal transplants.

7 al nutrition (86% vs. 84%) or have undergone intestinal transplant (28% vs. 23%).

8 on (1 of 19, 5%) when compared with isolated intestinal transplants and modified multivisceral transp

9 was sent to IT programs registered with the Intestinal Transplant Association.

10 Twenty-seven adult patients received 29 intestinal transplants between July 2004 and March 2007.

11 A total of 2744 small intestinal transplant biopsies within 3 months after Itx

12 Since 2006, the number of new intestinal transplant candidates listed each year has de

13 ll recipients who actually received isolated intestinal transplants during this period.

14 We performed a living-related intestinal transplant for a paraplegic, 16-year-old boy

15 Intestinal transplants from living-related donors can be

16 After intestinal transplant, immune-mediated dysmotility is co

17 Intestinal transplant is an established treatment of irr

18 g complications and need to be evaluated for intestinal transplants (ITs).

19 Establishment of a new intestinal transplant (Itx) program in the United States

20 In adult isolated intestinal transplant (ITx) retransplants (n=41), patien

21 Outcomes of intestinal transplants (ITx; n = 977) for pediatric pati

22 death (DBD) and on 46 patients on the active intestinal transplant list over 12 months from 14 April

23 d persistence of chimerism in a large animal intestinal transplant model.

24 registry graft survival data, the number of intestinal transplants necessary to demonstrate a no-mis

25 Historically, intestinal transplant occurred primarily in the pediatri

26 s single center study reviews the records of intestinal transplant patients between 2004 and 2010.

27 wnregulated in the peripheral blood of three intestinal transplant patients during rejection.

28 A database of intestinal transplant patients was maintained with prosp

29 We report two intestinal transplant patients who developed TMA while o

30 reports the management and complications for intestinal transplant patients with abdominal wall closu

31 od gene expression analysis was performed in intestinal transplant patients.

32 ons, would be a major advance in the care of intestinal transplant patients.

33 rs of graft rejection in peripheral blood of intestinal transplant patients.

34 minal allograft until the end of a prolonged intestinal transplant procedure would cause severe ische

35 ement strategies currently under evaluation, intestinal transplant procedures have the potential to b

36 We evaluated an intestinal transplant recipient who required very large

37 A total of 168 consecutive intestinal transplant recipients (86 children and 82 adu

38 I-FABP was repetitively measured in nine intestinal transplant recipients and correlated with fin

39 blood spot (DBS) citrulline samples from 57 intestinal transplant recipients at or beyond 3 months p

40 We reviewed results among intestinal transplant recipients before and after the in

41 ith biopsy is the standard method to monitor intestinal transplant recipients but it is invasive, cos

42 ndications of allograft rejection, pediatric intestinal transplant recipients do not have primary dis

43 examined: normal untreated controls, control intestinal transplant recipients kept in room air, and r

44 A total of 22 isolated intestinal transplant recipients underwent graft enterec

45 and closure of the abdominal compartment in intestinal transplant recipients with complex abdominal

46 l alternative to assist graft enterectomy in intestinal transplant recipients without causing severe

47 gle center cohort of 245 consecutive primary intestinal transplant recipients, among which 93 receive

48 ssociated with inferior graft outcomes among intestinal transplant recipients.

49 r, and management of PLP deficiency in adult intestinal transplant recipients.

50 onor colon should actively be considered for intestinal transplant recipients.

51 ions was maintained when evaluating only the intestinal transplant recipients.

52 LD, but its use has not yet been reported in intestinal transplant recipients.

53 Intestinal Failure and Transplantation, the Intestinal Transplant Registry, and the literature.

54 Intestinal transplant salvage was performed in four pati

55 Current outcomes indicate that intestinal transplants should be considered earlier in i

56 biliverdin would protect rat syngeneic small intestinal transplants (SITx) against damage and, if so,

57 5%, better in patients receiving an isolated intestinal transplant than a combined liver/bowel transp

58 ts 18 years or older (except those receiving intestinal transplants) transplanted between January 1,

59 13 months (range, 7-88), being assessed for intestinal transplant underwent simultaneous OGD and EUS

60 Intestinal transplants using cadaver donors have become

61 Intestinal transplants using living-related donors have

62 Intestinal transplant wait-list mortality is higher than

63 April 1998 to October 2004, 12 living donor intestinal transplants were performed in 11 patients (7

64 Thirty-one intestinal transplants were performed in 29 patients at

65 Sixty-seven intestinal transplants were performed in 65 patients fro

66 Children are the primary candidates for intestinal transplant with more than 70% requiring a com

67 the donor and recipient charts of all of our intestinal transplants with regard to the performance of