ライフサイエンスコーパス: joint replacement

1 ures and 68 women were admitted for elective joint replacement.

2 es with advanced OA, obtained at the time of joint replacement.

3 on is the most common cause of failure after joint replacement.

4 ily placed on hold because of AEs leading to joint replacement.

5 arthritis (OA) synovium at the time of total joint replacement.

6 rovement, and psychological well-being after joint replacement.

7 phonates for retention of bone density after joint replacement.

8 ly pain and physical function improved after joint replacement.

9 s in bodily pain and physical function after joint replacement.

10 ower extremities, often requiring additional joint replacements.

11 ging in patients with failed lower extremity joint replacements.

12 CABG and (OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.67-1.28) for joint replacement].

13 ents with large joint OA who underwent total joint replacement (1,201 of whom had the nodal phenotype

14 Of the women admitted for elective joint replacement, 17 had osteoporosis and 51 did not.

15 diabetes (9.1% vs. 6.4%; P = 0.002) and for joint replacements (2.5% vs. 1.3%; P = 0.006).

16 eas osteoarthritis (4.00, 95% CI 3.32-4.81), joint replacement (6.02, 95% CI 4.66-7.77), osteoporosis

17 ract removal (9.3%), colonoscopy (8.6%), and joint replacement (6.2%).

18 For total joint replacement, a composite quality index was 54% at

19 Among potential candidates for joint replacement, African American patients have signif

20 ances in our understanding of outcomes after joint replacement aid in predicting best candidates for

21 ective, preference-sensitive procedures (eg, joint replacement and back surgery) and nondiscretionary

22 Twenty patients with hip OA awaiting joint replacement and displaying signs of referred pain

23 less likely than whites to be familiar with joint replacement and more likely to expect a longer dur

24 d an approximately 2-fold reduction in total joint replacement and mortality.

25 patients in their "willingness" to consider joint replacement and to determine the factors that infl

26 College of Rheumatology criteria) requiring joint replacement and with moderate-to-severe pain that

27 cOGEN study, 80% of whom had undergone total joint replacement, and 11,009 unrelated controls from th

28 questionnaire also asked about big toe pain, joint replacement, and history of osteoarthritis and rhe

29 he role of patellar resurfacing during total joint replacement, and the use of bisphosphonates for re

30 vice beneficiaries who had a lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital betwe

31 Lower extremity joint replacement at a BPCI-participating hospital.

32 In addition, the volume of total joint replacements at this center increased during the d

33 cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors, infected total joint replacements, back pain, and Lyme disease.

34 In the context of joint replacement bundled payments, these data suggest t

35 t Questionnaire score, and presence of total joint replacement, but not by diabetes, smoking, exercis

36 cation procedure coding was used to identify joint replacement cases.

37 Under the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model, hospitals are held accoun

38 e, lower extremity fracture, lower extremity joint replacement, debility, neurologic disorders, and b

39 Between 1990 and 2005, hip or knee joint replacement due to OA was performed in 60 subjects

40 endent predictor of the risk of hip and knee joint replacement due to severe OA.

41 ere Medicare beneficiaries and who underwent joint replacement during the period from 2011 through 20

42 There were 29441 lower extremity joint replacement episodes in the baseline period and 31

43 e payments declined more for lower extremity joint replacement episodes provided in BPCI-participatin

44 The previously validated Joint Replacement Expectations Survey was used to assess

45 cartilage was obtained from femoral heads at joint replacement for OA or following fracture to the fe

46 d tibial plateau of patients undergoing knee joint replacement for OA.

47 articular cartilage from patients undergoing joint replacement for osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid ar

48 (TEM) in the BM of patients undergoing total joint replacement for osteoarthritis.

49 otential of developing alternatives to total joint replacement for treating osteoarthritis.

50 l tissues obtained from 16 donors undergoing joint replacement for treatment of osteoarthritis.

51 Total joint replacements for end-stage osteoarthritis of the h

52 he risk of developing SA (excluding infected joint replacements) for individuals with RA was calculat

53 Postoperative mortality after hip joint replacement has fallen substantially.

54 Wear debris in joint replacements has been suggested as a cause of asso

55 ovement projects included total hip and knee joint replacement, hospitalist laboratory utilization, a

56 We identified 23251 joint replacements (ie, episodes of care).

57 atients to express "willingness" to consider joint replacement if the procedure was needed and recomm

58 % CIs) were calculated for the risk of total joint replacement in association with age, sex, body mas

59 e consisted of patients with a primary total joint replacement in Denmark and the United Kingdom (n =

60 tly higher ORs for an association with total joint replacement in nodal OA cases than in non-nodal OA

61 ent community studies confirm the benefit of joint replacement in OA, though a number of questions re

62 compared with thematic content from patient joint replacement information materials.

63 Joint replacement is an effective treatment for symptoma

64 tly, treatment options remain inadequate and joint replacement is often inevitable.

65 phylaxis to prevent late infections in total joint replacement is to narrow the targeted hosts to tho

66 nses and further suggest that wear debris in joint replacements may have Th2-type inflammatory proper

67 y-four patients suspected of having infected joint replacement (n = 12), diabetic pedal osteomyelitis

68 is that resulted in a physician's visit or a joint replacement not associated with a hip fracture was

69 an arthritis-related physician's visit or a joint replacement not associated with a hip fracture.

70 ss "willing" than white patients to consider joint replacement (odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence inter

71 in 1,247 patients who had undergone elective joint replacement of the hip or the knee due to end-stag

72 e treatment of arthritis relates to surgical joint replacements of the hips/knees.

73 logy criteria for OA and had undergone total joint replacement or arthroscopy.

74 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92-1.28] or joint replacement (OR = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.58-1.12).

75 s for CABG (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.97-1.14) or joint replacement (OR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23).

76 CABG and (OR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.22-4.26) for joint replacement] or serious complication rates [(OR =

77 omen with osteoporosis admitted for elective joint replacement (P = .01) (medians, 32.4, 49.9, and 55

78 n without osteoporosis admitted for elective joint replacement (P = .02) and than women with osteopor

79 spital status, number of beds, percentage of joint replacements performed on African American patient

80 The number of joint replacement procedures performed is growing faster

81 of surgeries evaluated, including orthopedic joint replacement procedures.

82 The success of the Joint Replacement Program demonstrates that VA-TAMMCS is

83 The Joint Replacement Program system redesign project was in

84 d on data for revision surgery from national joint-replacement registries and on patient-reported out

85 Joint replacement research has explored minimally invasi

86 dal osteoarthritis, knee pain, big toe pain, joint replacement, self-reported osteoarthritis, and sel

87 With the increase in numbers of joint replacements, spinal surgeries, and dental implant

88 In a joint replacement study, serum D-COMP (p = 0.017), but n

89 ies were still 14% more likely to have total joint replacement surgeries (OR 1.14 [95% CI 1.13-1.16])

90 tilage samples across 38 patients undergoing joint replacement surgery (discovery cohort: 12 knee OA,

91 iden mutation who are undergoing hip or knee joint replacement surgery and are receiving effective an

92 222) with osteoarthritis undergoing primary joint replacement surgery at a university hospital betwe

93 they age, in several instances necessitating joint replacement surgery by the third decade of life.

94 Joint replacement surgery continues to grow in sheer num

95 Joint replacement surgery due to severe hip or knee OA w

96 e obtained from femoral heads at the time of joint replacement surgery for OA or femoral neck fractur

97 the United States for thromboprophylaxis in joint replacement surgery in spite of being associated w

98 sion analysis, the adjusted relative risk of joint replacement surgery in the highest versus the lowe

99 sive surgical site infection (SSI) following joint replacement surgery is an important criterion used

100 al differences in patients' expectations for joint replacement surgery outcomes.

101 evention of SSIs, but their effectiveness in joint replacement surgery remains unclear.

102 rom tissue removed at the time of OA-related joint replacement surgery were also immunostained for ni

103 steoarthritis [OA] patients undergoing total joint replacement surgery) were stimulated with cytokine

104 tissue was obtained from RA patients during joint replacement surgery, and histologic changes in the

105 ts obtained from patients with RA undergoing joint replacement surgery, or human dermal fibroblasts,

106 invasive and computer-guided or robot-guided joint replacement surgery, the best operative choice for

107 age tissue isolated from patients undergoing joint replacement surgery, yet their role in disease pat

108 ays after surgery in 120 patients undergoing joint replacement surgery.

109 and 1999, including hospital admissions and joint replacement surgery.

110 bank, and from OA patients undergoing total joint replacement surgery.

111 0 baseline visit and tested as predictors of joint replacement surgery.

112 highly significant predictor of the risk of joint replacement surgery.

113 m the menisci of 3 adults who underwent knee joint replacement surgery.

114 inforce the improved pain and function after joint replacement surgery.

115 S2 with mRNA extracted from the cartilage of joint-replacement surgery OA patients revealed a signifi

116 which will ultimately reduce the demand for joint-replacement surgery.

117 e cartilage of OA patients who had undergone joint-replacement surgery.

118 In April 2009, an analysis of joint replacement surgical procedures at the Richard L.

119 Exclusion criteria were history of major joint replacement, terminal illness, inflammatory arthri

120 hey were less likely than whites to perceive joint replacement therapy as efficacious (odds ratio 0.5

121 Joint replacement therapy is an effective treatment opti

122 ho were undergoing primary or revision total joint replacement (TJR) surgery.

123 Total joint replacement (TJR) was selected as a marker of end-

124 5.8%-5.9%) for patients with lower extremity joint replacement to 18.8% (95% CI, 18.8%-18.9%).

125 l patients who underwent cardiac, orthopedic joint replacement, vascular, colorectal, and hysterectom

126 and knee replacements while increasing total joint replacement volume at this medical center.

127 ategories risk score, rural hospital status, joint replacement volume, percentage of Medicaid dischar

128 Life-table analyses showed that joint replacement was performed at a mean age of 55 year

129 ORs for total joint replacement were compared between cases of nodal O

130 e, burn, head trauma, spinal cord injury, or joint replacement were excluded from this study.

131 tive processes for patients undergoing total joint replacement were redesigned following the VA-TAMMC

132 Total joint replacements were reported in 8 patients: 1 in the

133 have compared cells from patients undergoing joint replacement with cells from normal donors.