ライフサイエンスコーパス: waiting list

1 rom ECMO, and 2 patients died on ECMO on the waiting list.

2 ival was worse for patients remaining on the waiting list.

3 ith end-stage lung disease on the transplant waiting list.

4 n associated with increased mortality on the waiting list.

5 4-1.00) less likely to place patients on the waiting list.

6 s following the inclusion of patients on the waiting list.

7 the comparison group were put on a 12 month waiting list.

8 inactive (status 7) on the kidney transplant waiting list.

9 ess cumulative 1-year mortality while on the waiting list.

10 ship-related differences in placement on the waiting list.

11 s, who constitute more than 40% of the organ waiting list.

12 recipient with the highest MELD score in the waiting list.

13 ant or registration on the kidney transplant waiting list.

14 st be weighed against harms to others on the waiting list.

15 ved a retransplants, and 857 remained on the waiting list.

16 idney transplantation when compared with the waiting list.

17 nt matching and significant mortality on the waiting list.

18 ansplant and from 8% to 76% for those on the waiting list.

19 y managed candidates on the heart transplant waiting list.

20 tervention with 15 matched controls from our waiting list.

21 and private facilities as per the transplant waiting list.

22 nts become seriously ill or die while on the waiting list.

23 men were placed on the renal transplantation waiting list.

24 losed by having the last donor donate to the waiting list.

25 aft for HCC and non-HCC patients on a common waiting list.

26 on the deceased-donor renal transplantation waiting list.

27 sequence may be an increase in deaths on the waiting list.

28 te of the mortality risk for patients on the waiting list.

29 rst kidney transplant were identified on our waiting list.

30 areas have reduced access to the transplant waiting list.

31 e weighed against the harms to others on the waiting list.

32 n the proportion of dialysis patients on the waiting list.

33 3% of patients were active on the transplant waiting list.

34 ease transplantation and reduce death on the waiting list.

35 , yet a lack of organs means many die on the waiting list.

36 erization for all sensitized patients on the waiting list.

37 ied within 90 days after registration on the waiting list.

38 n 18 months or younger who died while on the waiting list.

39 donors with ESRD never gained access to the waiting list.

40 competing risks of death or removal from the waiting list.

41 omorbidity score at the time of entering the waiting list.

42 their patients about likely outcomes on the waiting list.

43 from the first point of active status on the waiting list.

44 lantation >/=3 years after activation to the waiting list.

45 y is even greater for those remaining on the waiting list.

46 randomly assigned to a training program or a waiting list.

47 annually, but many other patients remain on waiting lists.

48 th care systems with limited budgets or long waiting lists.

49 s; many patients deteriorate or die while on waiting lists.

50 istration than did those who remained on the waiting list (0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.91).

51 ysical function worsened per 3 months on the waiting list: -0.38 kg in grip strength, -0.05 meters/se

52 tinence rates than the self-help (17.9%) and waiting list (10.1%) conditions.

53 Of 2181 patients registered on the waiting list, 802 (37%) died or were removed from the li

54 were higher in the therapist-led (88.3%) and waiting list (81.2%) conditions than in the therapist-as

55 ansplant, patients must first be placed on a waiting list-a decision made at most transplant centers

56 We sought to compare liver transplant waiting list access by demographics and geography relati

57 significant comorbidities, activated on the waiting list after 2007, or unsensitized at activation.

58 derwent lung transplant, and two died on the waiting list after 9 and 63 days on ECMO, respectively.

59 here are 216 patients on the lung transplant waiting list and 17 on heart and lung transplant list.

60 4% of the study population was placed on the waiting list and 32.5% received a deceased donor transpl

61 he life course of patients on the transplant waiting list and after LT.

62 Early addition to a waiting list and aggressive multimodal therapy provide e

63 ts to take into account risk of death on the waiting list and chance of survival posttransplant.

64 verrepresented on the kidney transplantation waiting list and experience longer wait times.

65 on policy for all patients on the transplant waiting list and for those with a functioning graft.

66 at comparing 5-year mortality rates between waiting list and kidney transplantation patients with he

67 s infection and compared death rates between waiting list and kidney transplantation.

68 edian time between being placed on the HELTx waiting list and LTx was 3 days (interquartile range: 1-

69 ), analytical parameters, time on transplant waiting list and post-transplant complications.

70 growing percentage of the overall transplant waiting list and raise questions about the stewardship o

71 to improvement in IBS symptoms compared to a waiting list and that treatment gains were maintained ov

72 andidates and nonexception candidates on the waiting list and to assess if the exception system contr

73 re still more rarely referred or accepted to waiting lists and, if enlisted, have less chances of act

74 over the entire course of their time on the waiting list, and 1132 (47%) were not listed as active s

75 Ten patients underwent ITx, 4 were on the waiting list, and 4 were unavailable for follow-up.

76 ly sensitized renal transplant candidates on waiting lists, and the presence of donor-specific alloan

77 ransplant in patients who were placed on the waiting list; and (3) graft loss or mortality after tran

78 ination of the high mortality on the cadaver waiting list (approximately 30%) represents a substantia

79 equently, waiting times and mortality on the waiting list are increasing dramatically.

80 ored at that point, whereas 1876 were on the waiting list at any time.

81 ved a KT and were censored, 1876 were on the waiting list at any time.

82 s (56%) were not active in the UK transplant waiting list at the time of kidney transplantation overs

83 One patient was taken off the waiting list because of severe deterioration.

84 the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) waiting list between 1999 and 2011.

85 work for Organ Sharing liver transplantation waiting list between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2

86 man, the access gap to the kidney transplant waiting list between Medicaid and private insurance decr

87 ts on 38,899 adults placed on the transplant waiting list between September 2001 and December 2006.

88 trol group) and controls who remained on the waiting list but did not receive a transplant (waiting-l

89 and 579 506 patients who were placed on the waiting list but did not undergo a transplant.

90 In comparison with patients on the waiting list but not transplanted, and with all patients

91 eceipt of a liver transplant or death on the waiting list, but disparities based on sex remain.

92 red, low-income adults, drawing names from a waiting list by lottery.

93 easons for removal from the liver transplant waiting list by Organ Procurement and Transplantation Ne

94 An increased risk of dropout on the waiting list can be expected, but with equivalent and sa

95 survival (ITTS) metric as the percentage of waiting list candidates surviving at least 1 year after

96 ed in 2009 to reduce pediatric deaths on the waiting list cannot yet be determined.

97 d blood group O and were in the highest-risk waiting-list category.

98 Yearly trends in waiting list characteristics and transplantation rates w

99 revealing an association between higher SMD, waiting list (comparator) (beta = -0.33 [95% CI, -0.55 t

100 tes with exceptions fared much better on the waiting list compared to those without exceptions in mea

101 a, female subjects had greater access to the waiting list compared with male subjects (acute: 0.428 v

102 e less likely to experience dropout from the waiting list compared with those aged 18 to 24 years (ad

103 ricans had significantly lower access to the waiting list compared with whites (acute: 0.201 versus 0

104 ate prolonged exposure treatment (N=36) or a waiting list condition (N=30) and underwent a second sca

105 ate prolonged exposure treatment (N=36) or a waiting list condition (N=30).

106 l-guided psychodynamic therapy (N=207), or a waiting list condition (N=79).

107 elated symptom reductions (compared with the waiting list condition) demonstrated 1) greater dorsal p

108 ion-focused supportive therapy, or a 14-week waiting list condition.

109 -assisted, or self-help group treatment or a waiting list condition.

110 The number of candidates on the waiting list continues to increase each year, while orga

111 Patients in the waiting list control condition exhibited little change i

112 (n=109), PE (n=104), CBT/PE (n=106), or to a waiting list control group (n=103).

113 on and treatment with care-as-usual (CAU) or waiting-list control for depressive and/or anxiety disor

114 ts randomly assigned to a therapy group or a waiting-list control group scanning was performed before

115 d 169 BCSs to either Internet-based CBT or a waiting-list control group.

116 -up call to facilitate Web site use, or to a waiting-list control.

117 Two-centre randomised waiting list controlled trial with 46 adults with persis

118 ifferent than those calculated from national waiting list data.

119 ates (HCC 79.05% versus non-HCC 40.60%), and waiting list death rates (HCC 4.49% versus non-HCC 24.63

120 d but exceptions were highly correlated with waiting list death rates, transplantation rates, and MEL

121 r transplantation rates and lower numbers of waiting list deaths.

122 rience significant functional decline on the waiting list, despite modest wait time and low baseline

123 Affluent patients in nations with long waiting lists do not always wait for donations from with

124 patient groups or barriers to evaluation and waiting list entry for rural residents with organ failur

125 caring responsibilities, adherence, time on waiting list, estimated survival and quality of life (QO

126 es for prioritizing children and time on the waiting list, favoring patients with high predicted post

127 plant recipients returning to the transplant waiting list following first graft failure.

128 there were more than 100,000 patients on the waiting list for a kidney transplant from a deceased don

129 patients who have been on the deceased-donor waiting list for a long time or those with a high calcul

130 pared it with the effect of remaining on the waiting list for a potential transplant from a donor wit

131 ing weighted to accelerate responders on the waiting list for a transplant.

132 11-19]; P < .001) than white patients on the waiting list for both periods.

133 namic therapy were significantly superior to waiting list for both remission and response.

134 l patients (n = 866) newly registered on the waiting list for heart transplantation between January 2

135 Consecutive patients referred or on the waiting list for heart transplantation from March 2013 u

136 months; 86% of the patients allocated to the waiting list for high-intensity CBT started treatment by

137 reas-kidney after loss of pancreas function (waiting list for IAK [WLI]).

138 the main risks of mortality for those on the waiting list for intestinal transplants.

139 it drugs are less likely to be placed on the waiting list for kidney transplant; and once on the list

140 The waiting list for kidney transplantation is long.

141 ully matched control groups of patients on a waiting list for kidney transplantation who continued to

142 lymphocytes from patients on dialysis on the waiting list for kidney transplantation.

143 e Andalusian Registry who were placed on the waiting list for KT during the study period (1984-2012).

144 onal study with follow-up of patients on the waiting list for liver transplants who subsequently rece

145 tructive sleep apnea syndrome in patients in waiting list for LT, and LT has an important influence i

146 ocedures in 160 transplant candidates on the waiting list for lung (n = 126) or heart (n = 34) transp

147 ficant number of patients who die while on a waiting list for lung transplantation (LTx) has led seve

148 ) greater than 50% and on the deceased-donor waiting list for more than 5 years to investigate the ef

149 eir general practitioner while on an 8-month waiting list for online CBT (control; n=148).

150 pients (OTRs); however, most patients on the waiting list for organ transplant in the United States a

151 tcomes in Cox model: (1) being placed on the waiting list for renal transplantation or transplanted (

152 e criteria to accept elderly patients on the waiting list for RT?

153 assess time to activation on the transplant waiting list for socially deprived patients among white

154 the medical-therapy group were assigned to a waiting list for surgery.

155 se in male renal patients on the transplant waiting list for their first kidney graft, using sensiti

156 All patients were on a waiting list for therapist-led CBT (treatment as usual).

157 heart transplantation and in patients on the waiting list for these organs.

158 During the last 20 years, waiting lists for renal transplantation (RT) have grown

159 the supportive therapy group, and 7% of the waiting list group had recovered from PTSD.

160 p and at baseline and 4 months later for the waiting list group.

161 Compared with the waiting-list group, greater improvement was observed in

162 randomly assigned to the intervention or the waiting-list group.

163 rates in the CBT, psychodynamic therapy, and waiting list groups were 36%, 26%, and 9%, respectively.

164 to verum acupuncture, sham acupuncture, and waiting list groups.

165 enters active on the national deceased-donor waiting list had antibody titers (total immunoglobulin l

166 o died categorized as inactive on the kidney waiting list has also increased markedly from 31% (n=119

167 Unfortunately, the kidney transplant waiting list has ballooned to over 100,000 Americans.

168 hnic inequity in access to kidney transplant waiting list has been described in the United States but

169 d 0-11 years) candidates added yearly to the waiting list has declined.

170 of new candidates on the pancreas transplant waiting list has decreased steadily since 2000; only 100

171 market and transplant tourism exist, and the waiting list has not been eliminated.

172 ew and prevalent pediatric candidates on the waiting list have decreased.

173 tality and morbidity on the heart transplant waiting list have decreased.

174 Unfortunately, many patients die on the waiting list hoping for a chance of survival.

175 number of adult candidates were added to the waiting list in a single year since 1998; donation and t

176 gnificantly higher incidence of death on the waiting list in LWTR than in SWTR (8.4% versus 1.6%, P <

177 f-help demonstrated modest benefits over the waiting list in reducing OCD symptoms (adjusted mean dif

178 n transplanted and patients remaining on the waiting list in the United Kingdom.

179 13,346 adults placed on the lung transplant waiting list in the United States between 2005 and 2011.

180 ability of liver transplant and death on the waiting list in the United States varies greatly by dona

181 inequity in access to renal transplantation waiting lists, in favor of men, has long since been demo

182 ive adult candidates on the heart transplant waiting list increased by 19.2%.

183 cal urgency status decreased and time on the waiting list increased in 2011.

184 caring responsibilities, and longer time on waiting list increased priority.

185 ivariate analyses, adjusting for time on the waiting list, maintenance on immunosuppression after tra

186 -six (186 males) of 411 patients entered the waiting list (median age, 23 yr; range, 5-58 yr).

187 redicting overall (0.68 vs. 0.64) and 90-day waiting list mortality (0.77 vs. 0.75).

188 gitudinal trajectory of physical function on waiting list mortality (=death or delisted for being too

189 udinal trajectories of physical function and waiting list mortality adjusted for MELD-Na, albumin, he

190 Cox regression was used to estimate waiting list mortality and posttransplant mortality sepa

191 US waiting list mortality for pediatric heart transplantati

192 ring tertiles 2 and 3 with tertile 1, showed waiting list mortality hazard ratios of 1.62 (95% confid

193 higher-risk organs with the consequences on waiting list mortality if the donor pool is reduced furt

194 d for heart transplantation face the highest waiting list mortality in solid-organ transplantation me

195 F and LAS were significantly associated with waiting list mortality in univariate analyses.

196 Multivariate predictors of waiting list mortality include extracorporeal membrane o

197 A time-dependent Cox regression waiting list mortality model estimated updated MELD comp

198 atients with irreversible liver disease, the waiting list mortality rate for children younger than 6

199 zation of available donor bowels and a lower waiting list mortality rate.

200 We examined waiting list mortality since the pediatric heart allocat

201 The risk for waiting list mortality varies considerably among HT cand

202 The contrast between ALD+ and ALD- waiting list mortality was significant only among HCV+ p

203 model was developed to predict the risk for waiting list mortality within 90 days, and listed patien

204 onors with recipients is essential to reduce waiting list mortality without reducing posttransplantat

205 esponse to deceased donor organ shortage and waiting list mortality, LDLT was initiated in 1989 in ch

206 LD) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection on waiting list mortality, posttransplant mortality, and th

207 generally increases with increasing risk for waiting list mortality, there is no measurable benefit i

208 the presence of HCV significantly increased waiting list mortality, with a covariate-adjusted hazard

209 to offer timely transplantation and decrease waiting list mortality.

210 , in candidates stratified by their risk for waiting list mortality.

211 nd higher bilirubin had significantly higher waiting list mortality.

212 n outcome or the potential impact of LDLT on waiting list mortality.

213 Updated MELD better predicts waiting list mortality.

214 ver transplantation and its association with waiting list mortality.

215 splantation (LT) exceeds supply, with rising waiting list mortality.

216 carcity of suitable donors resulting in high waiting list mortality.

217 n measure were significantly associated with waiting list mortality: grip (hazard ratio = 0.89, 95% c

218 d to prioritize organ allocation to minimize waiting-list mortality and maximize 1-year survival.

219 This has created unacceptably high waiting-list mortality for lung transplant recipients.

220 causes offer an opportunity to decrease this waiting-list mortality.

221 Among patients on the waiting list (n = 1876) who died (n = 446; 24%), 272 (61

222 21.7%) within 3 years of registering on the waiting list (odds ratio [OR], 1.51; 95% confidence inte

223 being registered on the national transplant waiting list (odds ratio=0.69; 95% confidence interval,

224 ublic education are necessary to address the waiting list of over 100,000 patients.

225 nts were well tolerated and were superior to waiting list on nearly all outcome measures; no differen

226 was observed between supportive therapy and waiting list on quality of life.

227 r-transplant control group and 89.6% for the waiting-list-only control group), 3 years (91.7% vs. 83.

228 iting list but did not receive a transplant (waiting-list-only control group).

229 r-transplant control group and 47.1% for the waiting-list-only control group; 76.3% for recipients wi

230 imary outcome was patient death while on the waiting list or after transplant.

231 (2007 for kidneys) who were removed from the waiting list or died awaiting a graft within 1 year was

232 re matched with controls who remained on the waiting list or received a transplant from a deceased do

233 o mortality for patients who remained on the waiting list or received DDLT (no LDLT group) according

234 s either registration for the deceased-donor waiting list or receiving a live-donor transplant, and s

235 vioral therapy (CBT) was more effective than waiting list or supportive counseling conditions.

236 in 2006 to placement on the renal transplant waiting list or to December 31, 2009.

237 robability of being listed on the transplant waiting list or with a longer time from dialysis start u

238 CBT was compared with a control (usual care, waiting list, or attention control) in individuals with

239 on of maintenance dialysis, placement on the waiting list, or receipt of a living or deceased donor k

240 -cytometric cross-match versus 65.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 47.1% for t

241 ol group at 1 year (95.0%, vs. 94.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 89.6% for t

242 received a transplant from a deceased donor (waiting-list-or-transplant control group) and controls w

243 mporary continuous-flow LVADs have favorable waiting list outcomes; however, they worsen significantl

244 p when compared to those who remained on the waiting list (p < 0.0001).

245 ily member rather than a patient on a public waiting list (P < 0.001 for each).

246 nabling improved organ accessibility for the waiting list patients and a better prediction of antibod

247 The control condition was an 8-week waiting list period preceding treatment.

248 also a marginally significant difference in waiting list placement by chain size: large chains compa

249 atients within 3 years of registering on the waiting list pre-MELD (61.6% vs 66.9%; OR, 0.75; 95% CI,

250 re enlistment; however, once included on the waiting list, priority strategies should be implemented

251 n in Oregon based on lottery drawings from a waiting list provided an opportunity to evaluate these e

252 fect of updated MELD on the liver transplant waiting list ranking.

253 Of 113,927 unique waiting list registrants, 4793 (4.2%) had HBV, and 40,92

254 The pattern of liver transplantation waiting list registration among patients with hepatitis

255 sease (MELD) score has led to a reduction in waiting list registration and waitlist mortality.

256 The incidence of waiting list registration for ESLD and fulminant liver d

257 dardized incidence rates were calculated for waiting list registration for liver transplantation by u

258 stration, we analyzed longitudinal trends in waiting list registration for patients with hepatitis B

259 Compared with urban residents, waiting list registration rates for rural/small town res

260 iral therapies has impacted liver transplant waiting list registration, we analyzed longitudinal tren

261 tive smoking history donor, by analysing all waiting-list registrations during the same period with a

262 Nevertheless, mortality on the waiting list remains significantly higher than after tra

263 More data on waiting list risk and outcomes should be provided.

264 social supports) compared with usual care or waiting list (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0.38,

265 lysis status, eGFR, time to transplantation, waiting list status, contrast material volume at index i

266 Alternate waiting list strategies expand listing criteria for pati

267 c (EXCOR) ventricular assist device improves waiting list survival for pediatric heart transplant can

268 ical circulatory assistance does not improve waiting list survival in these patients.

269 tation within 1 year after activation to the waiting list than with delayed non-ECD transplantation >

270 ed within 3 months after registration on the waiting list, the combination of the MELD score and the

271 t transplanted, and with all patients on the waiting list, the risk of death after EGL decreased to b

272 lants was 124.6 per 100 patient-years on the waiting list; the highest rate was for patients aged les

273 in the number of patients on the transplant waiting list, there remains a significant gap between th

274 ent of disease stage IV lesions and a longer waiting list time and being older at the time of the tra

275 orically had a more rapid progression on the waiting list to receive a liver transplant.

276 tients if they had undergone, or were on the waiting list to undergo, lung transplantation, lobectomy

277 ing from donation directly to deceased-donor waiting lists to benefit one recipient or chain transpla

278 er randomisation; surgeons coordinated their waiting lists to schedule surgeries as close as possible

279 oved as "too sick" to number who died on the waiting list varied by region from 0.23 to 0.94, indicat

280 Mortality on the waiting list was 18% in 2015, 4% of patients were delist

281 Overall mortality on the waiting list was 24%, and cardiovascular disease was the

282 ary outcome; placement on the deceased donor waiting list was also examined.

283 access to the national renal transplantation waiting list was assessed in 9497 men and 5386 women age

284 A major cause of death in the waiting list was cardiovascular diseases, whereas infect

285 registered on the deceased donor transplant waiting list was determined for each renal unit.

286 ership) on placement on the renal transplant waiting list was evaluated by multi-level mixed-effect r

287 annual change in the size of the transplant waiting list was examined before and after presentation

288 27.29% of the waiting list was occupied by candidates with exceptions.

289 Survival on the waiting list was similar between groups, but mechanical

290 From the UK adult kidney transplant waiting list, we selected crossmatch positive living don

291 in 2011, 41% of prevalent candidates on the waiting list were aged 18 years or older.

292 ney transplant and those dying on the kidney waiting list were analyzed to make a current assessment

293 didates designated as inactive on the kidney waiting list were examined to determine total length of

294 Disparities in access to the waiting list were mitigated in Hispanic patients with pr

295 live donor as compared with remaining on the waiting list, whether or not a kidney from a deceased do

296 uld substantially reduce the nation's kidney waiting list while providing many more donors the opport

297 dney disease patients on the transplantation waiting list who underwent renal transplantation.

298 antation (LT) are often treated while on the waiting list with locoregional therapy (LRT), which is a

299 The risk for death while on the waiting list within 90 days increased from 1.6% to 19% a

300 55), including PE therapy, EMDR therapy, and waiting list (WL) of 13 outpatient mental health service