戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1  beta-blocker use, and propensity to receive antiarrhythmics.
2 elopments in the clinical usage of class III antiarrhythmics.
3 ed inhibitors, including anticonvulsants and antiarrhythmics.
4 3.0 [1.6-5.5]) or used no confounding drugs (antiarrhythmics, 2.4 [1.4-4.3]; QT-prolonging drugs, 3.1
5 nths follow-up, 68% remained AF-free off all antiarrhythmics; 74% remained AF-free and 66% remained A
6 eraction of the antiviral sofosbuvir and the antiarrhythmics amiodarone has been reported to cause fa
7              Most patients were treated with antiarrhythmics and one third required electrophysiology
8 current sustained VT and had failed multiple antiarrhythmics and radiofrequency ablations.
9    The impact of various strategies, such as antiarrhythmics and warfarin, aimed at reducing AF and i
10 els are inhibited by many local anesthetics, antiarrhythmics, and antiepileptic drugs.
11 ble of precipitating arrhythmias and include antiarrhythmics, antianginals, antiemetics, gastrointest
12                                              Antiarrhythmics, anticonvulsants, and local anesthetics
13 rmaceutical interest, including anesthetics, antiarrhythmics, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, antih
14    Amiodarone should be used only when other antiarrhythmics are ineffective or contraindicated.
15                              Newer and safer antiarrhythmics are now available.
16                                    Class III antiarrhythmics are the mainstay of treatment in this gr
17  freedom from AF and 84% freedom from AF off antiarrhythmics at 2 years.
18 ns were rediscovered causing increasing INR (antiarrhythmics class III [amiodarone], other opioids [t
19     Patients comedicated with mibefradil and antiarrhythmics (class I or III), including amiodarone,
20                               In patients on antiarrhythmics, dual-site RA prolonged and high RA tren
21                           Although class III antiarrhythmics, e.g., dofetilide, rescue congenital and
22 formation regarding amiodarone when choosing antiarrhythmics for acute resuscitation.
23 er successful inpatient loading of class III antiarrhythmics may occur during routine outpatient care
24                  In outpatients on class III antiarrhythmics (n=1676), 16.5% had high-risk QTc prolon
25 ked among patients randomized to amiodarone (Antiarrhythmics or Ablation for Ventricular Tachycardia
26 solved with short-term therapy; no permanent antiarrhythmics or ablations were needed.
27 hannel inhibitors used as local anesthetics, antiarrhythmics, or antiepileptics typically have the pr
28 g outcome, such as earlier administration of antiarrhythmics, reconsideration of epinephrine use or d
29 l problems, yet forward rate dependent (FRD) antiarrhythmics remain elusive.
30                      Sodium channel-blocking antiarrhythmics, such as lidocaine, potently inhibit thi
31                            Screening for the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
32                                       In the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
33                                          The Antiarrhythmics versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
34  describes the outcomes of patients from the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
35                                          The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
36                                          The Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
37 ts with VF or symptomatic VT followed in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators (AVID)
38    Data for 491 ICD patients enrolled in the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators Study
39 l secondary prevention trials, including the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators Study
40            Three-year survival data from the Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators trail
41  measure generic and disease-specific QoL in Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators trial
42     Randomized clinical trials such as AVID (Antiarrhythmics Versus Implantable Defibrillators) are d
43 patients using rhythm (class Ia, Ic, and III antiarrhythmics), versus rate control (beta-blockers, ca
44 dom from AF was 93%, and freedom from AF off antiarrhythmics was 82%, at a mean follow-up time of 3.6
45                              Epinephrine and antiarrhythmics were administered as per guidelines.
46 er BP medications, aspirin, antibiotics, and antiarrhythmics were associated with survival and consid
47                           In addition, novel antiarrhythmics with more atrial specific effects may re
48 A total of 95% of patients were treated with antiarrhythmics, with 43% requiring >1 antiarrhythmic.
49 , reveals distinct binding poses for the two antiarrhythmics within the pore domain.