ライフサイエンスコーパス: ST segment

1 DEHEART trial (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infar

2 AD, leaflet redundancy, and T-wave inversion/ST-segment depression (all p < 0.0001) but not with mitr

3 end-systolic diameter, and T-wave inversion/ST-segment depression (all p <= 0.001).

4 th much higher biomarker thresholds, (2) new ST-segment depression of >=1 mm for the primary and >=0.

5 The implantable cardiac system detects early ST-segment deviation and alerts patients of a potential

6 were analyzed within a core laboratory; sum ST-segment deviation resolution >=50% was defined as suc

7 hat alerts patients with rapidly progressive ST-segment deviation.

8 ation DES over BMS in large coronary culprit ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction lesions.

9 stents (<3.50 mm), among 1498 patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction undergoing pri

10 tion, and presented more frequently with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome compared wi

11 lder than 18 years with unstable angina, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or S

12 vely enrolled 27 patients with anterior wall ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 4

13 elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with

14 ina or urgent PCI for unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction less than 30

15 raphy (ECG) showed signs of ongoing anterior ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, and emergent

16 raphy (ECG) showed signs of ongoing anterior ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, and emergent

17 in patients with unstable angina (UA) or non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) myocardial infarction (MI).

18 syndrome (25%), which consisted of both non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (14%) and S

19 ctive invasive strategy in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS)

20 In patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS),

21 ease and stable ischaemic heart disease, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome or ST-segme

22 ministration strategies in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing

23 ein IIb/IIIa Inhibition in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial.

24 e key in the management of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, the optima

25 A total of 8,404 patients, with or without ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, were rando

26 ein IIb/IIIa Inhibition in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome; NCT0008989

27 compared with prasugrel in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS)

28 isk of adverse outcomes versus men after non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS)

29 concomitant clopidogrel presenting with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS)

30 myocardial infarction [STEMI], n = 399; non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes [NSTE-ACS]

31 Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes include un

32 Adult (>18 years) comatose survivors without ST-segment elevation after resuscitation from out-of-hos

33 as seen more commonly in admissions with non-ST-segment elevation AMI-CS, nonwhite race, and higher b

34 s with acute myocardial infarction including ST-segment elevation and non-ST-segment elevation were r

35 The increase of type-1 ST-segment elevation correlated with AES expansion (r=0.

36 r access complication, and one had transient ST-segment elevation from air-embolism, without sequelae

37 arction (MI) (18.7% vs. 22.5%; p < 0.001) or ST-segment elevation MI (8.5% vs. 15.7%; p < 0.001).

38 n-hospital reperfusion rates and outcomes of ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) in renal transplant reci

39 Among patients with ST-segment elevation MI and multivessel coronary artery

40 ar risk of incident MI (0.8% annually), with ST-segment elevation MI constituting one-third of all ca

41 utic approach deserves to be investigated in ST-segment elevation MI patients.

42 Among 2,296 patients, non-ST-segment elevation MI prevalence was 9.8%.

43 20% of MI cases and presented more often as ST-segment elevation MI versus MI not related to a stent

44 ntration was measured in 1,398 patients with ST-segment elevation MI who enrolled in a prospective co

45 h all-cause mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation MI who underwent primary percutaneo

46 (mean age 67.1 years; 61.3% male; 78.8% non-ST-segment elevation MI).

47 All presented with MI; 25.7% had ST-segment elevation MI, 74.3% had non-ST-segment elevat

48 % had ST-segment elevation MI, 74.3% had non-ST-segment elevation MI, and 8.9% had ventricular tachyc

49 ower EF were more likely to have experienced ST-segment elevation MI, have higher troponin values, an

50 age of 45 years; 19% were women, and 54% had ST-segment elevation MI.

51 elevation acute coronary syndrome (14%) and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (11%).

52 SCAD patients more frequently presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (57% vs. 36%;

53 Findings were similar for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coeffici

54 0; 95% CI: -0.98 to 1.58; p = 0.637) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (ATE coeffici

55 without PCI or in those with a diagnosis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (group by PCI

56 ISR PCI were less likely to present with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (18.7% v

57 cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) and mult

58 complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) with mul

59 rapid triage of patients with suspected non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI).

60 vation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) pati

61 ruction commonly affects patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and i

62 cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and m

63 rt failure and non-fatal AMI at 12-months in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and n

64 Challenges to improving ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care

65 To date there are few reports of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cause

66 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) compl

67 e carry an increased risk of mortality after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) compl

68 may have potentially refrained patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) from

69 an alternative to mechanical reperfusion for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in se

70 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is th

71 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may n

72 ical trial, we enrolled patients with either ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or no

73 Singapore Myocardial Infarction Registry] of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patie

74 Circulating EPA in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) relat

75 tated after cardiac arrest in the absence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remai

76 Myocardial damage due to acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remai

77 In ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), a ge

78 In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), perc

79 In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the

80 are largely unknown in SCAD presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

81 ping to interrogate the myocardium following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

82 e epicardial and microvascular flow in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

83 Smoking is a well-documented risk for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

84 imary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

85 prove the clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

86 nts standard care for treating patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

87 moking is a well-established risk factor for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); howe

88 CI full bivalirudin was administered in 612 (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI], n =

89 In patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and an ischem

90 bstruction affects one-half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and confers a

91 Patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and elevated

92 lirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients o

93 ation myocardial infarction (group by PCI or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction interaction e

94 r CTA first in the diagnostic process in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is a safe gat

95 Timely restoration of perfusion in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is associated

96 her this is true in a real-world prehospital ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction network using

97 Of the 5583 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients in t

98 In this large Canadian ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction registry, a p

99 ected patients presenting with suspected non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to the emerge

100 orithm for rapid rule-out and rule-in of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction using high-se

101 entation, with <=2 hours of symptoms or with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were excluded

102 mber 21, 2017, 440 patients, presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction within 6 h of

103 oing single-vessel FFR assessment (excluding ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) from April 1

104 Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic

105 segment elevation acute coronary syndrome or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, with or with

106 percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

107 ry syndromes include unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

108 ars, 72 (76.6%) were men, and 65 (69.1%) had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

109 patients resuscitated from VF/pVT OHCA with ST-segment elevation on their postresuscitation ECG, the

110 tients resuscitated from VF/pVT OHCA without ST-segment elevation on their postresuscitation ECG, the

111 Women had lower rates of ST-segment elevation presentation (73.0% versus 78.7%),

112 nary syndrome (ACS) patients with or without ST-segment elevation remains unclear.

113 ction including ST-segment elevation and non-ST-segment elevation were recruited between February 201

114 n on the basis of the presence or absence of ST-segment elevation, a century-old technology.

115 Angina, initial shockable rhythm, ST-segment elevation, and absence of known coronary arte

116 patency, the quantitative intracoronary ECG ST-segment elevation, and angina pectoris during the sam

117 ith acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation, the incidence of death, myocardial

118 In ACS patients with or without ST-segment elevation, the primary endpoint did not diffe

119 udin regimen in ACS patients with or without ST-segment elevation.

120 The MIs included 28 (19%) with ST-segment elevation.

121 with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST-segment elevation.

122 iac arrest is uncertain for patients without ST-segment elevation.

123 rdiac arrest, particularly in the absence of ST-segment elevation.

124 (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.69-1.04]; P=0.11); non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (RR, 0.84 [

125 esions; (3) patients who have suffered a non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome; and (4) pa

126 vation myocardial infarction (84.4%) and non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes (71.5%) th

127 t IL-1 receptor antagonist, in patients with ST-segment-elevation acute myocardial infarction or hear

128 odels were created to explore all MI and non-ST-segment-elevation MI (NSTEMI) versus ST-segment-eleva

129 non-ST-segment-elevation MI (NSTEMI) versus ST-segment-elevation MI (STEMI) over time.

130 tion MI hospitalization was smaller than for ST-segment-elevation MI among both women and men (-1.9%

131 rst hospitalization for AMI overall, and for ST-segment-elevation MI and non-ST-segment-elevation MI

132 s -8.3% (95% CI, -8.0% to -8.6%).The AAPC in ST-segment-elevation MI changed among women in 2009 (200

133 Dynamic changes in post-ST-segment-elevation MI edema highlight the need for sta

134 The AAPC for ST-segment-elevation MI hospitalization overall was -8.3

135 The AAPC for non-ST-segment-elevation MI hospitalization was smaller than

136 A total of 16 patients with anterior ST-segment-elevation MI successfully treated by primary

137 all, and for ST-segment-elevation MI and non-ST-segment-elevation MI was identified by International

138 aphy can be challenging in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation MI.

139 ity to identify the IRA in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation MI.

140 t-elevation myocardial infarction (45%), and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (33%).

141 med for stable angina (66%), followed by non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (45%), and ST

142 was more frequently used among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (84.4%) and n

143 ning the infarct-related artery (IRA) in non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) can be c

144 In patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and

145 1.03); P=0.07; multivessel disease following ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (RR, 0.84 [95

146 Systems to improve ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care

147 Mortality of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) decre

148 nary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has b

149 ival for overweight and obese patients after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has b

150 imately half of the patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have

151 The optimal treatment strategy for treating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in co

152 cardiovascular disease in general and acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in pa

153 of persistent T2 hyperintensity after acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is un

154 e ACS clinical presentation consisted of non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) type

155 l patients and for patients with and without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) under

156 e direct immediate intervention and therapy, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) victi

157 In ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), infa

158 ompared with clopidogrel among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), thou

159 presentation and management of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

160 vately insured individuals hospitalized with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

161 rse cardiac events (MACE) following an acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

162 rognostic utility in patients after an acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

163 Participants were stratified by AMI subtype (ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] and n

164 o determine if timing of cell delivery after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction affects recov

165 mproves myocardial dynamics in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and is an ind

166 In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess

167 ete revascularization in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess

168 complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess

169 tructive nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess

170 us coronary intervention in 93 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivess

171 nger age categories and in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and stable an

172 rfusion times and mortality in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction are influence

173 ions in time to reperfusion in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction as well as in

174 riage of survivors of cardiac arrest without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction at the point

175 vely investigated 215 patients admitted with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction between April

176 ention among 95 925 patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction between Janua

177 patients who have undergone primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction but have resi

178 scoring model was developed and validated on ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction cohorts from

179 infarction and multivessel disease; and the ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction culprit vesse

180 Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction developing ad

181 Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction did not impro

182 During Primary PCI), 440 patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction from 11 UK ho

183 by 9254 operators at 1538 hospitals for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction from 2009 to

184 cardiovascular magnetic resonance following ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction have recently

185 ive sample of patients in China admitted for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in 2001, 2006

186 patients with LV dysfunction after extensive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in terms of g

187 ely 4% to 5%, a figure comparable to that of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of

188 igher rates of reperfusion for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the interv

189 re performed in 1119 patients discharged for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction included in a

190 lor maintenance therapy after revascularized ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction is associated

191 ndings support efforts to implement regional ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction networks focu

192 , admitted with acute myocardial infarction (ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction or type I non

193 milar number had acute presentation (49% non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable a

194 d, single-blind, controlled trial randomized ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients 1:1

195 METHODS AND Consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients from

196 r obstruction, which occurs in around 50% of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients post

197 We randomized 122 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients to p

198 provides better prognostic stratification of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients trea

199 and led to a relevant decrease in TA use in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients unde

200 Between June 2017 and June 2018, 150 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were

201 A total of 55 809 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were

202 mized, Phase III STEM-AMI OUTCOME trial, 161 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were

203 ND In this prospective study, 88 consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were

204 tions and the documented survival benefit in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients who

205 of a prospective trial which randomized 696 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with

206 A total of 322 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with

207 reserve-guided complete revascularization in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with

208 selective use of CMR for risk prediction in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with

209 METHODS AND Hospitals (n=167 with 23 498 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients) wer

210 its robust risk stratification of discharged ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients, but

211 eluting stent (SES) at 12-month follow-up in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.

212 ognostic value over clinical risk factors in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.

213 elop and validate a CMR-based risk score for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.

214 pectively collected data on 5665 consecutive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction PCI patients

215 aseline differences, clinical outcomes after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction PCI were simi

216 oup analysis, we included 1653 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction randomized to

217 A total of 110 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction received a lo

218 available process measure for patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction requiring int

219 2017, treatment times of 2063 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction requiring int

220 n 1 h after pPCI in patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction scheduled for

221 in the Netherlands, enrolling patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction scheduled to

222 r is recommended in patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction scheduled to

223 e analysis of bivalirudin versus UFH for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction to date, biva

224 MVO in a cohort of consecutive patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with

225 cardiac mortality in patients with high-risk ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with

226 econdary prevention therapy in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe

227 7, we included all consecutive patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe

228 d with reduced infarct size in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe

229 ects of NAC on infarct size in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pe

230 tor antagonists are delayed in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

231 Adult patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

232 In a cohort of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

233 platelet aggregation (IPA) in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

234 n a head-to-head comparison in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

235 ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

236 In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing pr

237 g with an acute coronary syndrome, including ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were enrolled

238 Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were excluded

239 One hundred patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were randomiz

240 A total of 122 P2Y(12)-naive patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction were randomly

241 gh-risk patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction who did not u

242 ospective cohort of unselected patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction with paired a

243 levation myocardial infarction or type I non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction), and own a s

244 reatment, 533 sustained ACS (excluding acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction).

245 Of 112 randomized patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, 75 (37 in NA

246 ccurs in a large proportion of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, adversely af

247 reperfusion strategy for patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, aiming at re

248 2015 included 120 cases; 75% presented with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and 80% had

249 O-PCI) in patients with multivessel disease, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and cardioge

250 d with acute congestive heart failure or non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and had mult

251 ikely to include high-risk features, such as ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic

252 For patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, national qua

253 In patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, percutaneous

254 r ejection fraction <30% within 4 days after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, primary vent

255 henotype were observed, particularly for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, reflecting a

256 utaneous coronary intervention for extensive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the effects

257 For patients presenting with an acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the most eff

258 patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, there may be

259 In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, ticagrelor m

260 going percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, we did not f

261 a cohort of stable reperfused patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

262 vents and new congestive heart failure after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

263 years, 62% were men, and 63% presented with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

264 importance in study participants with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

265 ies into improved clinical outcome following ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

266 lysis cases, 29.4% were women, and 21.0% had ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

267 hy-guided revascularization in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

268 predictor of left ventricular remodeling in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

269 s coronary intervention improves outcomes in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

270 gnosis, particularly for older patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

271 ombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

272 ardiography for a selective use of CMR after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

273 on of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

274 assessment of myocardial injury early after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

275 ry intervention for patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

276 n is essential for in-hospital management of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

277 ic ability of admission LUS in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

278 raphic recanalization rates in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

279 imary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

280 , infarct size, and clinical outcomes, after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.

281 versus placebo in 120 patients with anterior ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarctions resulting in

282 ing analyses of patients with large anterior ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarctions, bone marrow

283 In acute ST-segment-elevationl infarction, IMR and RRR, but not C

284 of coronary angiography in patients without ST-segment elevations is less clear.

285 rgency coronary angiography in patients with ST-segment elevations on ECG after OHCA, while the role

286 ach is that it captures small changes in the ST segment over time that cannot be detected by visual i

287 rticularly without a persistent elevation of ST-segment reflected in an electrocardiogram or in blood

288 in the culprit artery (P=0.020), incomplete ST-segment resolution (P=0.037), and higher troponin (P=

289 farct-related artery before pPCI or complete ST-segment resolution 1 h after pPCI in patients present

290 Complete ST-segment resolution 1 hour after pPCI was present in 5

291 l coronary angiography, and complete (>=70%) ST-segment resolution 1 hour after pPCI.

292 vasive strategy was associated with improved ST-segment resolution and enhanced outcomes within 1 yea

293 ehospital pharmacoinvasive strategy, similar ST-segment resolution and rescue rates were observed wit

294 ST-segment resolution occurred in 16 (32%) high MI PCI v

295 There was greater ST-segment resolution post-catheterization/percutaneous

296 Angiographic recanalization before PCI, ST-segment resolution, infarct size by magnetic resonanc

297 cardiac monitoring with real-time alarms for ST-segment shift that exceeds a subject's self-normative

298 c monitor with real-time alarms for abnormal ST-segment shifts to reduce pre-hospital delay during AC

299 distinct (P wave, PR segment, QRS interval, ST segment, T wave, and TP segment) and 2 composite, con

300 -wave onset to R-peak, R-peak to R-wave end, ST-segment, T-wave onset to T-peak, and T-peak to T-wave