ライフサイエンスコーパス: EGD

1 EGD and APE prevalence (6.9% for both) showed significan

2 EGD and biopsy had been performed in 4 patients resultin

3 EGD and colonoscopy were performed in 302 and 547 patien

4 EGD did not reveal positive findings in any patients wit

5 EGD findings revealed normal esophagus in 84.6% of patie

6 EGD in the Gaza Strip revealed a high prevalence of gast

7 EGD performed 2+/-1 days post ablation demonstrated supe

8 EGD was most commonly performed to evaluate dyspepsia an

9 outpatient control groups were recruited: 1) EGD Group, subjects matched to Barrett's esophagus cases

10 Of 149 EGDs and 224 colonoscopies, 17.6% and 14.7% respectively

11 erapy (EGD-->BB) if varices are present, (2) EGD followed by endoscopic band ligation (EBL) (EGD-->EB

12 Thirty-two IEPs from 26 EGDs, 4 EUS, 1 SBE, and 1 ERCP were identified.

13 HEPAVIR criteria spared 10.1%, 25.5% and 28% EGD, while missing 0%, 1.2% and 2.2% EVNT, respectively.

14 <30 kPa (HIV cirrhosis criteria), with 34.6% EGD spared and 0% EVNT missed.

15 ded 287 patients (54 Barrett's esophagus, 62 EGD, and 171 colonoscopy subjects).

16 HIV cirrhosis criteria spared 54% and 48.7% EGD, while missing 4.9% and 2.2% EVNT, respectively.

17 MGC was defined as GC undetected in a EGD performed 3 to 36 months before diagnosis.

18 the clinical presentation, the accompanying EGD [esophagogastroduodenoscopy] findings and other rele

19 = 5) and if CT scans were performed after an EGD.

20 imately 12% of Medicare beneficiaries had an EGD between 2004 and 2006 (n = 108 785).

21 in 3 Medicare beneficiaries who received an EGD had a repeated EGD within 3 years.

22 When an EGD is indicated, regardless of the symptoms, IV sedatio

23 way can support growth of strains 10403S and EGD-e, but only anaerobically.

24 opy should be performed when colonoscopy and EGD were negative, particularly in patients with signifi

25 GD) in 11 of 36 patients, and on both CT and EGD in 10 of 36 patients.

26 r L. monocytogenes strains, 10403S, LO28 and EGD, all commonly regarded as wild-type isolates, and fi

27 In the case of 10403S, LO28 and EGD, several other readily metabolized mono- and disacch

28 ed every 3 months, and HVPG measurements and EGD were done annually.

29 zation of Abnormalities in Chest X-rays) and EGD-CXR (Eye Gaze Data for Chest X-rays) to develop a co

30 ctober 2023 and had both a follow-up TBE and EGD three to six months later.

31 inide then increased arrhythmic tendency and EGD ratio but conserved DeltaAPD90; reduced EGD ratios a

32 ed electrogram durations (EGD), expressed as EGD ratios, in arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/Delta hearts, and p

33 ed more frequently with an abnormal baseline EGD (70% vs. 37%; p = 0.04) and had a higher incidence o

34 The correlation between EGD and HRES was r = .50.

35 ients had their initial endoscopic biopsies (EGDs) reviewed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

36 l patients were correctly identified by both EGD and HRES as grade I (no varices).

37 ns revealed more endoscopic findings in both EGD (46.3% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.049) and colonoscopy (23.6%

38 w (1.2 pMol per 10(9) cells per minute), but EGD-e transported [59Fe]-apoferrichrome similarly to E.

39 stematic reintroduction of foods followed by EGD and biopsies (n = 20).

40 ion, followed by sedated conventional EGD (c-EGD) (Olympus GIF-100 or GIF-Q140) by a staff endoscopis

41 GD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed.

42 s only slightly worse than that of sedated c-EGD (median, 2 vs. 1 on a scale of 1-10).

43 dollars (+/- 100.8 US dollars) for sedated C-EGD and 328.6 US dollars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsed

44 s satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EGD and are just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EG

45 randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar.

46 In patients, compared with sedated c-EGD, sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were 96% and 97% accur

47 randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD.

48 nd to have NDBE on their first 2 consecutive EGDs.

49 ) sedation, followed by sedated conventional EGD (c-EGD) (Olympus GIF-100 or GIF-Q140) by a staff end

50 athin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse American population is needed.

51 ts and complications of sedated conventional EGD.

52 patients], and the Erasmus Glioma Database [EGD, 456 patients]) and internal datasets collected from

53 and soft tissue excessive gingival display (EGD) etiologies (hypermobile upper lip [HUL], altered pa

54 Excessive gingival display (EGD) has a negative impact on a pleasant smile.

55 Excessive gingival display (EGD), or a gummy smile (GS), is a mucogingival deformity

56 gene drive (NGD) and engineered gene drive (EGD) arguing against James et al., who think both should

57 who had underdone esophago-gastro-duodenal (EGD) video endoscopy at two general hospitals in Erzurum

58 uspected EoE, esophago-gastric-duodenoscopy (EGD) with multiple esophageal biopsies should be perform

59 urations, expressed as electrogram duration (EGD) ratios, with shortening S1-S2 intervals in arrhythm

60 emonstrated increased electrogram durations (EGD), expressed as EGD ratios, in arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/

61 roscopic aspects of esophageal mucosa during EGD.

62 tal LOS for low-risk UGIH patients was early EGD.

63 followed by endoscopic band ligation (EBL) (EGD-->EBL) if varices are present, (3) selective screeni

64 diagnostic esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy for health examination were enrolle

65 rategies: (1) universal screening endoscopy (EGD) followed by beta-blocker (BB) therapy (EGD-->BB) if

66 Follow-up endoscopy (EGD) was performed at day 14 after the APC procedure.

67 Upper endoscopy (EGD) was performed in 961 persons with no prior history

68 y in 1 from 10 esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD), 0 from 7 colonoscopies, 3 from 5 push enteroscopie

69 ved in 1-3% of esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGD).

70 EoE underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs), biopsies, and skin-prick tests for food and aeroa

71 Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is an effective technique for diagnosing gastric ca

72 Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is done often for various indications.

73 provided 18,444 esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reports, 20,748 colonoscopy reports, and 9767 flexi

74 In adults, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and duodenal biopsies may then be performed for pur

75 An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed before and immediately after the proc

76 have received an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) within 3 years before diagnosis, termed post-endosc

77 comorbidity, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) findings to predict risk of adverse events.

78 y worldwide, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) remains the gold standard for both diagnosis and th

79 diagnosis during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), based on ammonium level.

80 for their first esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) or their first endoscopic therapy of early neoplast

81 E at their first esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

82 indings at index esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) first showing GIM, recommended interval for repeat

83 er PV isolation, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed to assess the incidence of ETLs.

84 complications of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) are related to sedation.

85 , and results of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), manometry, and pH monitoring were collected and an

86 ith dyspepsia on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for rapid urease test, histology and PCR examinatio

87 53 patients, on esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in 11 of 36 patients, and on both CT and EGD in 10

88 of preresection esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in predicting the patients in whom surgery could po

89 elines recommend esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with cirrhosis to screen for gastroesop

90 CE could replace esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and biopsy under certain circumstances.

91 Screening esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is recommended for all cirrhotic patients at the ti

92 ients undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and small bowel endoscopy for chronic

93 When undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), patients with a diagnosis of achalasia may receive

94 ho had undergone esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy or both for abdominal complaints at th

95 DA who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and/or colonoscopy at the Brooklyn VA Hospital betw

96 y; 75% underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), while 25% underwent a colonoscopy.

97 void unnecessary esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) screening for esophageal varices needing treatment

98 Unsedated esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) using conventional 8-11-mm endoscopes is an alterna

99 integrated with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) by analyzing gastric fluid DNA (gfDNA) from a large

100 ideotaped HRES and videotaped esophagoscopy (EGD).

101 The final EGD diagnoses for the recruited patients were portal hyp

102 ed in 81 of 1152 patients during their first EGD (7.0%).

103 ected 50% of patients undergoing their first EGD.

104 assification index was 37.8% (P = 0.002) for EGD and 110.9% (P <0.001) for colonoscopy, thus improvin

105 Per patient costs ($Canadian) were $1475 for EGD + WC, $1014 for ESM + WC, and $906 for ESM + SC.

106 ients with CT-identified varices and 18% for EGD-identified varices.

107 U, 0.93 for UWM, 0.94 for UCSF, and 0.88 for EGD test sets.

108 d the diagnostic yield was 24/302 (7.9%) for EGD and 219/547 (40.0%) for colonoscopy.

109 U, 0.96 for UWM, 0.93 for UCSF, and 0.90 for EGD.

110 ver correlation for HRES was r = .88 and for EGD was r = .79.

111 patients, the most frequent indications for EGD were dyspepsia (19.5%), followed by hematemesis (19.

112 Consecutive adult outpatients referred for EGD were prospectively enrolled between December 2021 an

113 en the two most common sedation regimens for EGD and colonoscopy in our hospital.

114 n patients with endoscopic findings, both in EGD (58.2% vs. 33.0%, P = 0.005) and in colonoscopy (57.

115 In addition to the changes in EGD ratio shown by WT hearts, these findings attribute a

116 Flecainide increased EGD ratios in WT (at 10 microM) and non-arrhythmogenic S

117 n the presence of quinidine, which increased EGD ratio but left DeltaAPD90 unchanged.

118 e used to identify patients who had an index EGD between 2004 and 2006.

119 with repeated EGD within 3 years of an index EGD.

120 oven GIM, 18 (5.2%) of whom had GAC at index EGD.

121 IM, there was a 5% incidence of GAC on index EGD.

122 ates in association with H pylori on initial EGD and EUS biopsies.

123 Of all patients with initial EGDs, 10% (n = 11 370) had an associated diagnosis sugge

124 es of two Listeria species, L. monocytogenes EGD-e and L. innocua CLIP 11262, contain homologous gene

125 lococcus aureus 502a, Listeria monocytogenes EGD, Escherichia coli ML35, and Cryptococcus neoformans

126 Most EGDs (>75%) were abnormal preceding diagnosis of PEUGIC.

127 within 6 to 36 months of a "cancer-negative" EGD, the mean interval was approximately 17 months.

128 reported at the preceding "cancer-negative" EGD.

129 Fifty-one patients with normal EGD and colonoscopy underwent small bowel endoscopy.

130 e sleep apnea, compared with 42% (n = 26) of EGD subjects (OR 1.73, 95% CI [0.83, 3.62]) and 37% (n =

131 r disease (LSM >10 kPa); (2) availability of EGD within 6 months of reliable LSM.

132 er disease (LSM >10 kPa); 2) availability of EGD within 6 months of reliable LSM.

133 rmed in 961 persons with no prior history of EGD who were scheduled for colonoscopy.

134 ndings highlight the continued importance of EGD as a diagnostic tool in resource-constrained healthc

135 iteria while sparing a significant number of EGD, thus improving resource utilization for HIV-related

136 optimization was based on the percentage of EGD spared, while keeping the risk of missing EVNT below

137 arices when compared to the gold standard of EGD.

138 le alternative approach for the treatment of EGD.

139 crown lengthening (ECL) for the treatment of EGD.

140 s such as the Gaza Strip, the utilization of EGD provides critical insights into disease burden, pati

141 e a significantly higher diagnostic yield of EGD as compared to symptomatic IDA patients within the s

142 We found the diagnostic yield of EGD to be significantly higher than that of colonoscopy

143 VIR criteria spared 10.1%, 25.5%, and 28% of EGDs, while missing 0%, 1.2%, and 2.2% of EVNT, respecti

144 kPa (HIV cirrhosis criteria), with 34.6% of EGDs spared and 0% EVNT missed.

145 V cirrhosis criteria spared 54% and 48.7% of EGDs, while missing 4.9% and 2.2% EVNT, respectively.

146 iteria while sparing a significant number of EGDs, thus improving resource utilization for PLWH with

147 optimization was based on the percentage of EGDs spared, while keeping the risk of missing EVNT <5%.

148 ted with liquid/solid esophageal contents on EGD (OR: 1.36; p = 0.004).

149 d to have clinically significant findings on EGD as compared with 42.9% of asymptomatic patients.

150 0.001) with true clinical workload ranks on EGD-CXR.

151 t of the 10 patients with no varices seen on EGD had varices identified by HRES.

152 The largest varix seen on EGD was graded on a 5-point scale.

153 ssociations between gingival display (GD) or EGD and UL anatomical characteristics, HUL, APE, and SUL

154 s, CT chest, CT chest and abdomen pelvis, or EGD were included (n = 470).

155 nts scheduled to undergo elective outpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD

156 The risk of aspiration on post-POEM EGD should be reduced due to improved esophageal emptyin

157 lowed) for 2 days prior to pre-and post-POEM EGD.

158 Preresection EGD is not reliable for determining the presence of resi

159 wenty-two of the 35 underwent a preresection EGD before resection.

160 had negative pathology from the preresection EGD, but seven of the 17 (41%) had residual tumor at sur

161 Post-procedural EGD showed a new injury in 86% (n = 43 of 50) of patient

162 EGD ratio but conserved DeltaAPD90; reduced EGD ratios and unaltered DeltaAPD90 values accompanied t

163 croM), whereas quinidine (10 microM) reduced EGD ratios and prolonged VERPs in WT and arrhythmogenic

164 arrhythmogenic Scn5a+/Delta hearts, reducing EGD ratio and restoring DeltaAPD90 to + 7.55 +/- 2.24 ms

165 onal characteristics and soft tissue-related EGD etiologies exhibit significant interracial and inter

166 For most patients (59%), repeat EGD was not recommended.

167 A repeat EGD was performed at day 28 after the APC procedure and

168 erval for repeat EGD, and findings at repeat EGD were abstracted.

169 showing GIM, recommended interval for repeat EGD, and findings at repeat EGD were abstracted.

170 esions were in the healing process on repeat EGD 4+/-2 days after initial endoscopy.

171 l ETLs were in the healing process on repeat EGD.

172 5% of patients underwent at least one repeat EGD, of whom 14% had multifocal GIM not previously detec

173 During a median time to repeat EGD of 13 months and cumulative follow-up of 119 patient

174 r 6 weeks of SFED, patients underwent repeat EGD and biopsies.

175 se, 33% (n = 36 331) had at least 1 repeated EGD within 3 years.

176 ficiaries who received an EGD had a repeated EGD within 3 years.

177 tle is known about the frequency of repeated EGD and the diagnoses that drive it.

178 patients with diagnoses at index or repeated EGD that did not suggest the need for a repeated examina

179 id not have a diagnosis at index or repeated EGD that justified a repeated examination.

180 the index diagnosis suggested that repeated EGD was expected, uncertain, or not expected.

181 9 687) came from the group in which repeated EGD was not expected.

182 Proportion of patients with repeated EGD within 3 years of an index EGD.

183 excluded, 43% of all patients with repeated EGDs (n = 15 706) did not have a diagnosis at index or r

184 e applied to identify patients not requiring EGD screening.

185 e found in 86 out of 18,496 (0.46%) reviewed EGD, corresponding to a total of 141 polyps.

186 of unsedated small-caliber transoral EGD (sc-EGD).

187 t of the technical feasibility of sedated sc-EGD and the tolerability of unsedated sc-EGD, respective

188 ndoscopist blinded to the findings of the sc-EGD.

189 determined by having each patient undergo sc-EGD (Pentax EG-1840) with (phase 3) and without (phase 4

190 Unsedated sc-EGD is technically feasible, tolerable, and accurate.

191 The overall acceptability of unsedated sc-EGD was only slightly worse than that of sedated c-EGD (

192 with sedated c-EGD, sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were 96% and 97% accurate, respectively.

193 gnostic accuracy of sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were determined by having each patient undergo sc-EG

194 Sedated and unsedated sc-EGD were technically feasible and tolerable in all volun

195 After unsedated sc-EGD, 98% of patients expressed willingness to undergo th

196 sc-EGD and the tolerability of unsedated sc-EGD, respectively, in volunteers.

197 to identify patients not requiring screening EGD.

198 d HUL were the most consistently significant EGD determinants.

199 Strain EGD-e used iron complexes of hydroxamates (ferrichrome a

200 thermarum and Listeria monocytogenes strain EGD-e while bound to native-like lipid membranes.

201 )-dependent promoter sequences in the strain EGD-e genome sequence.

202 verall K(M) of Hn uptake by wild-type strain EGD-e was 1 nM, and it occurred at similar rates (V(max)

203 well-characterized L. monocytogenes strains: EGD, 10403, Mack (serotype1/2a), L028 (serotype 1/2c), S

204 NDBE on 3, 4, and 5 consecutive surveillance EGDs.

205 strategy, in turn, both the EGD-->BB and the EGD-->EBL strategies cost over $175,000 more per additio

206 ric beta-blocker strategy, in turn, both the EGD-->BB and the EGD-->EBL strategies cost over $175,000

207 of chronic liver disease is reflected in the EGD findings, while the colonoscopy results suggest a po

208 y reported FosX encoded in the genome of the EGD strain of L. monocytogenes (FosXLMEGD).

209 outperformed state-of-the-art methods on the EGD-CXR and REFLACX datasets, achieving IoU scores of 0.

210 (EGD) followed by beta-blocker (BB) therapy (EGD-->BB) if varices are present, (2) EGD followed by en

211 Compared to EGD-verified varices, CT scans demonstrated a sensitivit

212 ccuracy of unsedated small-caliber transoral EGD (sc-EGD).

213 ndomized trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a

214 d management outcomes of patients undergoing EGD at the Gaza Strip Hospitals.

215 al of 18,496 consecutive patients undergoing EGD over a 10-year period in a tertiary hospital were re

216 2013, 25,037 patients from Erzurum underwent EGD procedures under either intravenous sedation or loca

217 All patients who underwent EGD during this timeframe were included, while those wit

218 Unsedated EGD using ultrathin 5-6-mm endoscopes is better tolerate

219 hagus free of liquid/solids during follow-up EGD after a 2-day solid fast.

220 patients frequently receive EI on follow-up EGD increasing costs, procedural time, and potential ris

221 trial comparing unsedated ultrathin EGD (UT-EGD) with sedated conventional EGD (C-EGD) in a diverse

222 llars (+/- 70.3 US dollars) for unsedated UT-EGD (P < 0.0001).

223 stics of patients randomized to unsedated UT-EGD and sedated C-EGD were similar.

224 Patients undergoing unsedated UT-EGD are as satisfied as patients undergoing sedated C-EG

225 tpatient EGD were randomized to unsedated UT-EGD or sedated C-EGD.

226 Unsedated UT-EGD was also faster, less costly, and may allow greater

227 re just as willing to repeat an unsedated UT-EGD.

228 2) ESM + WC and 3) endoscopically placed WC (EGD + WC) using publicly funded health care system persp

229 replace biopsy as the mode of diagnosis when EGD is either declined or contraindicated, or when duode

230 f chronic diarrhea in Thai patients, whereas EGD provided some benefits.

231 IEPs associated with EGD, upper EUS, small bowel enteroscopy (SBE), and ERCP

232 was conducted in 28 patients presenting with EGD.