ライフサイエンスコーパス: ischemia time

1 t delays to a PCI-capable facility (incurred ischemia time).

2 ), particularly in regards to decreased warm ischemia time.

3 rs can be made without unduly increasing the ischemia time.

4 h donor BMI >30 (P=0.06) and increasing cold-ischemia time.

5 nors (n = 14) matched for age, BMI, and cold ischemia time.

6 n mismatch, pretransplant dialysis, and cold ischemia time.

7 m closure and hemostasis with a limited warm ischemia time.

8 or type, HLA mismatches, donor age, and cold ischemia time.

9 onor, PRA as a continuous variable, and cold ischemia time.

10 CD14 mRNA correlated with the length of cold ischemia time.

11 t have significantly altered expression with ischemia time.

12 -term graft survival despite increasing cold ischemia time.

13 zed patients in spite of similar length cold ischemia time.

14 alent in cadaveric allografts with long cold ischemia time.

15 aminase, UNOS status, donor gender, and warm ischemia time.

16 ables included age, weight, gender, and cold ischemia time.

17 terms of recipient sex, race, age, and cold ischemia time.

18 xamined for age, sex, and pretransplantation ischemia time.

19 on, use of anti-lymphocyte agents, and graft ischemia time.

20 enriched in DCD donors after the first warm ischemia time.

21 ty of life, shorter operating time, and warm ischemia time.

22 at cardiac allografts subjected to prolonged ischemia time.

23 the larger/deeper the tumor, the longer the ischemia time.

24 iversity of Wisconsin solution and 6-hr cold ischemia time.

25 en group but nonsignificantly different warm ischemia times.

26 der, more mismatched donors with longer cold ischemia times.

27 ospital stay, immunosuppressive regimen, and ischemia times.

28 in grafts from older donors and longer cold ischemia times.

29 ytokines appear to require extended visceral ischemia times.

30 ssive injury patterns associated with longer ischemia times.

31 = .04) and warm (46 vs 41 minutes; P < .001) ischemia times.

32 eys, which is susceptible to changes in warm ischemia times.

33 and significantly decreased with longer warm ischemia times.

34 f delayed graft function (38% vs. 26%), cold ischemia times (12.9 vs. 13.5 hr), and graft survival wa

35 T was 8 out of 73 transplants (11%).The cold ischemia time (14.3 +/- 3.03 hr) in this group was signi

36 rations of perfusion (1 and 24 hr), and warm ischemia times (15 and 45 min).

37 ean, 159 vs. 188 min; P<0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (2 vs. 5 min; P<0.001) and a lower intraop

38 er circulatory death (DCD, n = 36, mean warm ischemia time = 2 min) and donation after brain death (D

39 time (571 vs. 471 days, P<0.01), longer cold ischemia time (22 vs. 20 hr, P<0.01), and donor and reci

40 are as follows: operative time 4.5 hr, warm ischemia time 25 min, and blood transfused (packed red b

41 th recipients of kidneys with a shorter cold ischemia time (3.2%).

42 stimated blood loss 344.2 +/- 690.3 mL, warm ischemia time 4.9 +/- 3.4 minutes, and donor length of s

43 We found that a prolonged cold ischemia time (6-12 hr) alone did not induce IE.

44 er transplant, 4) medical urgency status, 5) ischemia time, 6) indication for transplantation, and 7)

45 iver Disease score was 15 (IQR, 11-21); cold ischemia time, 8.0 hours (IQR, 6.4-9.7 hours); MEAF, 4 (

46 r remaining in situ for 120 min (30-min warm ischemia time, 90-min cold ischemia time), the second ki

47 s of panel-reactive antibodies, shorter cold ischemia times, a lower incidence of delayed graft funct

48 Increased donor age and cold ischemia time additionally decreased graft survival, whe

49 donor organ was subjected to 1 hour of warm ischemia time after circulatory cessation, then flushed

50 Ischemia times along with other tumor/recipient variable

51 th DDK with non-DGF after adjusting for cold ischemia time (alpha=0.001).

52 s of kidneys with less than 12 hours of cold ischemia time and 74,997 dollars for those with more tha

53 donors, and is associated with a longer cold ischemia time and a potentially higher rejection rate.

54 factors for reduced graft survival are cold ischemia time and donor age.

55 l as clinical factors, such as cold and warm ischemia time and HLA mismatch.

56 Ischemia time and its components (transport time and sur

57 e reallocated without delay to minimize cold ischemia time and maximize the utility of the graft.

58 s showed no significant differences for warm ischemia time and other donor outcomes, delayed graft fu

59 intrahepatic strictures, and prolonged cold ischemia time and rejection were associated with stone o

60 When results were adjusted for cold ischemia time and sex, iNO significantly decreased hospi

61 PST is not correlated with ischemia time and should not be used as a surrogate of p

62 Non-treated allogeneic grafts without cold ischemia time and syngeneic grafts did not develop any T

63 The short tolerable cold ischemia time and the importance of other risk factors h

64 ective cross-match as a means to reduce cold ischemia time and the incidence of delayed graft functio

65 Prolonged cold ischemia time and use of a whole graft with recipient he

66 SLD grafts also had significantly longer ischemia times and a higher incidence of graft loss owin

67 llocation variance designed to minimize cold ischemia times and encourage adoption of DCD protocols a

68 VI, whereas there was no association between ischemia times and HCC recurrence in patients with no VI

69 tion was found between prolonged total graft ischemia times and primary graft failure or survival fol

70 It abolishes ex vivo benching and prolonged ischemia times and provides two optimal grafts with hemo

71 ocused on graft damage due to prolonged cold ischemia times and rewarming during the long benching pr

72 y allograft dysfunction with increasing cold ischemia times and should be transplanted within 12 hr.

73 We herein investigate critical ischemia times and the effect of novel preservation solu

74 by incorporating duration of symptoms (fixed ischemia time) and anticipated transport delays to a PCI

75 with early transplant stressors (e.g., cold ischemia time) and donor aging.

76 body titer, extent of HLA matching, and cold-ischemia time), and post-transplantation variables (pres

77 gnificant factors such as HLA mismatch, cold ischemia time, and African-American or diabetic recipien

78 l sepsis) and donor factors (donor age, cold ischemia time, and donor cytomegalovirus status), modes

79 an leukocyte antigen-B and DR mismatch, cold ischemia time, and double or en bloc transplant.

80 l demographics included operative time, warm ischemia time, and estimated blood loss.

81 lanted, increment of insulin secretion, cold ischemia time, and exocrine tissue volume transplanted,

82 , age of donor kidney, damage caused by cold ischemia time, and mode of donor death all had substanti

83 score, patient age, pretransplant bilirubin, ischemia time, and operative blood loss were not signifi

84 t survival is affected by donor gender, warm ischemia time, and pretransplant patient condition.

85 include both nonimmunologic (donor age, cold ischemia time, and recipient race) and immunologic facto

86 recipient and donor race and donor age, cold ischemia time, and the pretransplantation use of either

87 hat received a liver graft with a 16-hr cold ischemia time, and the survival rate was 83% after 5 day

88 fects of this system on graft survival, cold ischemia time, and the transplantation of highly sensiti

89 , use of anti-lymphocyte preparations, graft ischemia time, and year of transplant were evenly distri

90 cute rejection; and donor age and race, cold ischemia time, and year of transplant.

91 vel, donor length of hospital stay, and warm ischemia time approached significance.

92 Bilirubin and cold ischemia time are crucial for graft outcome post-LT.

93 Efforts to minimize ischemia time are important for long-term renal function

94 Amount of kidney excised and ischemia time are inseparably interlinked; the larger/de

95 othermia should be considered if longer warm ischemia times are anticipated (i.e. >25 min).

96 se retrieved from cadaver donors, where cold ischemia times are significantly longer.

97 orm this type of anastomosis may reduce warm ischemia time as well.

98 .9) and warm (>50 minutes; P=0.003; HR=2.84) ischemia times as independent risk factors for HCC recur

99 Outcomes evaluated were operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, donor complications, length

100 mplications, conversions, operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, length of hospital stay, pai

101 The HGM Program resulted in longer ischemia times, but graft survival was not affected.

102 rectomy group had shorter operative and warm ischemia times by 52 minutes (P < 0.001) and 102 seconds

103 iver Disease score, and longer warm and cold ischemia times (C statistic, 0.75).

104 rs, whereas donor age, gender and race, cold ischemia time, cadaveric versus living donor, delay in i

105 t this risk was limited to kidneys with cold ischemia time (CIT) >12 hours.

106 non-AA donor (HR 1.66, P < 0.001), and cold ischemia time (CIT) (HR 1.03 per hour >8 hours, P = 0.03

107 ) and kidneys with longer than 30 hr of cold ischemia time (CIT) (OR, 0.95; per 5% increment; 95% CI,

108 Prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) affected BT rate significantly (CIT>

109 Cadaveric kidneys experiencing longer cold ischemia time (CIT) are associated with higher levels of

110 We used cold ischemia time (CIT) as an instrument to test the hypothe

111 mulative recurrence curves according to cold ischemia time (CIT) at 2-hour intervals and warm ischemi

112 Prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) is associated with a significant ris

113 zing "modifiable risk factors," such as cold ischemia time (CIT) recipient warm ischemia time (WIT) a

114 The effect of this policy on cold ischemia time (CIT), delayed graft function (DGF), and t

115 iates in both groups, while donor race, cold ischemia time (CIT), female to male transplants, and rec

116 Imported pancreata accumulate cold ischemia time (CIT), limiting utilization and worsening

117 ated in addition to causes of prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT).

118 e, donor warm ischemia time (DWIT), and cold ischemia time (CIT).

119 criteria and the requirement for short cold-ischemia time (CIT).

120 entage of transplanted ECD kidneys with cold ischemia times (CIT) <12 hr increased significantly; the

121 Concerns remain over prolonged cold ischemia times (CIT) associated with shipping kidneys lo

122 r short (3 hr; control) or long (18 hr) cold ischemia times (CIT).

123 omena, such as donor death and possibly cold ischemia time, contributed to differences in complement

124 hereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased.

125 hereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased.

126 used to measure the relationships among cold ischemia time, delayed graft function, acute rejection,

127 Primary outcomes were discard, cold-ischemia time, delayed graft function, and 1-year graft

128 dy more than 0%, cytomegalovirus D+/R-, cold ischemia time, delayed graft function, induction with an

129 Ischemia time-dependently decreased cardiac BH(4) conten

130 antation model grafts subjected to long cold ischemia time developed severe TV with intimal hyperplas

131 es, including donor brain death, longer cold ischemia time, diabetogenic immunosuppression, and auto-

132 Longer (120 min) ischemia times did not affect the number of apoptotic ce

133 o significant differences in donor age, cold ischemia time, digestion time, or weight of the pancreas

134 nel-reactive antibody level, HLA match, cold ischemia time, donor age, and expanded criteria donation

135 Cold ischemia times, donor age, and preoperative eGFR for tho

136 us at transplantation, donor age, donor warm ischemia time (DWIT), and cold ischemia time (CIT).

137 Cadaveric transplants, prolonged cold ischemia time, elevated panel reactive antibody, and rec

138 panded criteria donor kidney (15%), and cold ischemia time exceeding 24 hr (27%).

139 rating room time (207 vs. 200 min.), or cold ischemia time (excluding pancreas).

140 Earlier transplantations, shorter ischemia times, female, older, hepatitis C virus positiv

141 The mean cold ischemia time for both groups was 11 +/-3 hr.

142 art of surgery (25 vs. 77 min), shorter cold ischemia time for recovered pancreases (355 vs. 630 min)

143 s (range, 1.0-50.0 years), and the mean cold ischemia time for the cadaveric kidneys was 27.0+/-9.4 h

144 group was significantly longer than the cold ischemia time for those without HAT (11.7 +/- 3.94 hr) (

145 nd-stage liver disease score, steatosis, and ischemia times for the peak or terminal serum sodium gro

146 In patients with embolization, the warm ischemia time (from embolization to removal of the graft

147 donor body mass index >30 and pancreas cold ischemia time greater than 12 hr.

148 Recipients of kidneys with cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr also had a higher throm

149 For CAD kidney recipients, organ cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr increased the risk for

150 (HLA) mismatches, increased donor age, cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr, African American recip

151 ts, retransplant recipients, donor age, warm ischemia time greater than 30 minutes and cold ischemic

152 t, donor age greater than 55 years, and cold ischemia time greater than 550 minutes were significant

153 race, Kidney Donor Profile Index > 50%, cold ischemia time > 24 hours) and low-risk (not having any r

154 reactive, donation after cardiac death, cold ischemia time >12 hours, ICU stay >5 days, 3 or more pre

155 DGF was associated with cold ischemia time >24 hr (P = 0.0003) and Rej (P = 0.06).

156 Donor age >50 years, BMI >30, warm ischemia time >25 minutes, ITU stay >7 days and ALT >/=

157 nor age >55 yr, non-heartbeating donor, cold ischemia time >36 h, and donor hypertension or diabetes

158 <60 mL/min/1.73m, PELD >25 points, and warm ischemia time >60 minutes.

159 years), donor hospital stay (>5 days), cold ischemia time (>10 hours), and warm ischemia time (>40 m

160 3 months posttransplant were prolonged cold ischemia time (>36 hours, odds ratio [OR]=3.38 vs. 0-36

161 s), cold ischemia time (>10 hours), and warm ischemia time (>40 minutes).

162 re common in patients with extended visceral ischemia times (>40 mins).

163 f sensitization, retransplantation, and cold ischemia time; however, EBK recipients were somewhat bet

164 correlation between apoptosis rate and cold ischemia time in CAD (r=0.86, P<0.001) renal allografts.

165 hat received a liver graft with a 16-hr cold ischemia time in Euro-Collins solution survived for more

166 5 years with a nearly 50% reduction of warm ischemia time in experienced hands.

167 reservation and baseline renal function over ischemia time in impacting post-partial nephrectomy func

168 4.6 years (range: 0.7-50), and the mean cold ischemia time in the cadaveric cases was 26.5+/-8.8 hr.

169 Ischemia times in vascularized composite allotransplanta

170 Older recipient age and prolonged cold ischemia time increase the risk of graft failure.

171 The median total ischemia time increased from 171 min (interquartile rang

172 Increased total ischemia time induced greater IL-8 expression during rep

173 cute ischemia predicted by the acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument (ACI-TIP

174 ischemia were enrolled in the Acute Cardiac Ischemia Time-Insensitive Predictive Instrument Clinical

175 k for Organ Sharing (UNOS) status, cold/warm ischemia time, intraoperative blood loss, and occurrence

176 Ischemia time is a risk factor for mortality after heart

177 In the clinic, donor cardiac graft ischemia time is limited to within a few hours and corre

178 ality are surgically nonmodifiable; however, ischemia time is.

179 d operative time, islet isolation time, warm ischemia time, islet equivalent (IE) counts, estimated b

180 specific antibody, negative crossmatch, warm ischemia time less than 60 min, absence of recipient spl

181 es, human leukocyte antigen antibodies, cold ischemia time, living donor, and preemptive transplantat

182 nefits of sustained euglycemia, shorter cold ischemia times, lower rates of sensitization, and early

183 Reducing ischemia time may be a useful strategy to decrease HCC r

184 There was no difference regarding cold ischemia time, model for end-stage liver disease score,

185 I 1.23-2.02, P<0.001), and kidneys with cold ischemia time more than 24 hr (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.65

186 CI 1.20-1.30, P=0.002) and kidneys with cold ischemia time more than 24 hr (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-2.00

187 onation after brain death (DBD, n = 76, warm ischemia time = none) were collected.

188 ed recipient BMI (P = 0.046), recipient warm ischemia time (odds ratio, OR, 1.032; 95% CI, 1.008-1.05

189 n estimated blood loss of 85.7 mL and a warm ischemia time of 116.0 seconds.

190 sed using this technique after a median cold ischemia time of 13 h 19 min.

191 kidney from extended criteria donors, a cold ischemia time of more than 30 hr, time of surgical proce

192 The cold-ischemia time of the donor hand was 310 minutes.

193 Mean warm ischemia time of the pancreas graft was 34 min.

194 Groups were divided into ischemia times of 45, 55, and 65min; each group was furt

195 ncluding those of cadaveric grafts with cold ischemia times of as long as 41 hr.

196 not spatial learning with increasing hypoxia-ischemia time on P10 in this model system.

197 associated with an increase (P>0.3) in total ischemia time, operative time, and packed red blood cell

198 unassociated with 0Pre biopsy findings, cold ischemia time, or peak PT values.

199 There was no difference in donor age, cold ischemia time, or recipient United Network for Organ Sha

200 s in recipient demographics, donor age, cold ischemia time, or total number of doses of Thymoglobulin

201 eduction in use of donors with extended cold ischemia time (p = 0.04) and private pay recipients (p =

202 ry complications (P = 0.04), and short total ischemia time (P = 0.05).

203 Bilirubin (P=0.006) and cold ischemia time (P=0.002) were predictive of graft loss at

204 for recipient age, sex, race, diabetes, cold ischemia time, panel cross-reactivity, pretransplant blo

205 e associated with shorter operative and warm ischemia times, patients undergoing laparoscopic nephrec

206 pancreata have not been used because of long ischemia times postprocurement.

207 for planning surgery and also decreases cold ischemia time, potentially translating into a higher suc

208 reas after kidney recipients, prolonged cold-ischemia time, prolonged donor hypotension, non-heart-be

209 uate differential gene expression because of ischemia time, prostate samples were divided into five t

210 negative association to DeltaCP/GCr was cold ischemia time (r=-0.330, P<0.001).

211 Sex, ischemia time, race, previous transplant, donor type, ne

212 ble models, each controlling for donor type, ischemia time, recipient age, use of antilymphocyte agen

213 al origin of procurement team, pancreas cold ischemia time, recipient cerebrovascular disease.

214 ffered in age, pretransplantation diagnosis, ischemia time, renal function, donor Toxoplasma serology

215 al anastomosis; use of ureteral stent; total ischemia time; serum creatinine on discharge; and need f

216 Ischemia time should be considered in organ allocation a

217 he paucity of suitable recipients, prolonged ischemia time should not preclude transplantation.

218 bility and thereby increase donor organ cold ischemia time that might then result in increased risk o

219 e U.S. study had a significantly longer cold ischemia time (the time elapsed between procurement of t

220 min (30-min warm ischemia time, 90-min cold ischemia time), the second kidney was removed (NHBD), fl

221 panel-reactive antibodies, and cold and warm ischemia time, the odds of oliguria were 1.60 (1.14 to 2

222 Assuming no change is cold ischemia time, the potential number of 0 CREG, 0 DR mm,

223 of 0-MM kidneys significantly increased cold ischemia time, the risk of graft loss was significantly

224 control groups were similar with respect to ischemia time, the size of the area at risk, and the eje

225 ctive antibody, delayed graft function, cold ischemia time, time since start of dialysis, etiology of

226 grafts were transplanted with a shorter cold ischemia time to more poorly HLA-matched recipients.

227 perioperative characteristics, such as warm ischemia time, to levels comparable to open surgery.

228 adjusting for recipient and donor age, cold ischemia time, urine output, and Scr.

229 Within this range of cold ischemia time, UW and HTK demonstrate similar efficacy i

230 hyma (influenced by surgical technique), and ischemia time (warm or cold) determines the ultimate fun

231 Mean kidney cold ischemia time was 10 +/- 3 and 50 +/- 15 hours, for grou

232 The median cold ischemia time was 12 h 30 min (range 5 h 25 min-18 h 22

233 ntigen (HLA) match was one; and average cold ischemia time was 12 hours.

234 asystole was 15.9+/-1.9 min and overall warm ischemia time was 12.5+/-1.0 min.

235 the marginal group, the cutoff value of cold ischemia time was 12.6 hr.

236 an hospital stay was 3.2 days, and mean warm ischemia time was 123.3 seconds.

237 Mean warm ischemia time was 14.7 minutes (range, 7-40 minutes).

238 The warm ischemia time was 21 minutes, and the cold ischemia was

239 Mean cold ischemia time was 26.9+/-8.6 hr.

240 In cadaveric grafts, the mean cold ischemia time was 29.0 hours +/- 6.9 in those with TRAS

241 Mean warm ischemia time was 3 minutes after laparoscopic harvest.

242 The mean cold ischemia time was 30.5+/-9.2 hr.

243 solation time was 185 (37) minutes, and warm ischemia time was 51 (62) minutes.

244 reatic excision was 34 minutes, whereas cold ischemia time was 6 hours and 40 minutes.

245 Average warm ischemia time was 76 minutes.

246 Mean cold ischemia time was 8.5 hr.

247 Cold ischemia time was a predictor of DGF independently of th

248 Length of ischemia time was correlated with early and sustained pr

249 ventional group, although operative time and ischemia time was higher in minimally invasive group, th

250 Cold ischemia time was longer in those with recurrent stenosi

251 Cold ischemia time was not found to be an important factor in

252 vs. 3.0+/-0.7 hours, P <0.04), whereas warm ischemia time was shorter (3:55+/-1:47 vs. 4:55+/-0:55 m

253 xpressing either P-selectin or vWF, the cold ischemia time was significantly longer (885 +/- 123 min

254 rienced early acute rejection, the mean cold ischemia time was significantly longer than in allograft

255 Cold ischemia time was strongly associated with DGF, with a 2

256 Per minute increase in warm ischemia time was the only significant risk factor for B

257 ifference, donor gender, donor type, or cold ischemia time were comparable.

258 ent) when the potential costs of longer cold ischemia time were considered.

259 because the additional costs of longer cold ischemia time were greater than the advantages of optimi

260 talization at time of OLT, and cold and warm ischemia time were independent predictors of survival.

261 Lactated Ringer's solution and 3-hr cold ischemia time were used for mechanistic investigations,

262 Mean cold and warm ischemia times were 9:08 +/- 2:57 hr and 51 +/- 9 min.

263 Mean cold ischemia times were less than 20 hr.

264 Mean ischemia times were significantly longer in the Celsior

265 e (PT), retransplantation, and warm and cold ischemia times, were applied to the UNOS database.

266 among the groups with the exception of cold ischemia time, which was longer in the MP group compared

267 proving renal cooling or shortening the warm ischemia time will expand its indications further.

268 h as cold ischemia time (CIT) recipient warm ischemia time (WIT) and the use of thrombolytic flush at

269 emia time (CIT) at 2-hour intervals and warm ischemia time (WIT) at 10-minute intervals showed that C

270 In the HCV+ cohort, recipient race, warm ischemia time (WIT), and diabetes also independently pre