ライフサイエンスコーパス: iliofemoral

1 Plaques were most common in the iliofemorals (44%), followed by the carotids (31%) and a

2 Many patients have suboptimal iliofemoral access options or reasons why early mobiliza

3 ssment of the aortic root, evaluation of the iliofemoral access route, and prediction of appropriate

4 signed to SAVR or TAVR (transfemoral [TF] if iliofemoral access was suitable or transapical [TA] if n

5 s Predicted Risk of Mortality 10.4 5.6%, 77% iliofemoral access).

6 with severe aortic stenosis and unfavorable iliofemoral access.

7 We evaluated ultrasound-detected carotid, iliofemoral, and abdominal aortic plaques; coronary arte

8 site (right/left carotids, aorta, right/left iliofemorals, and coronary arteries).

9 orial subclinical atherosclerosis (carotids, iliofemorals, aorta, and coronaries).

10 related complication (SRC) was defined as an iliofemoral arterial injury not including a cannulation

11 However, the size and caliber of the iliofemoral arterial system are influenced by patient si

12 ned with intravenous streptokinase, 10 of 17 iliofemoral arteries (59%) treated with transcutaneous u

13 Pairs of iliofemoral arteries in 10 rabbits were randomized to re

14 Balloon-mediated injury of iliofemoral arteries in rabbits resulted in prominent de

15 During dissolution, retention in porcine iliofemoral arteries is predicted to be dominated by sol

16 tion was induced electrically in 48 pairs of iliofemoral arteries of 24 rabbits; arterial occlusions

17 PC) on neointimal lesions in balloon-injured iliofemoral arteries of hypercholesterolemic rabbits.

18 All 10 iliofemoral arteries treated with PESDA + ultrasound wer

19 7 of 24 rabbits, 14 thrombotically occluded iliofemoral arteries were exposed to ultrasound alone wi

20 The pairs of iliofemoral arteries were randomized to receive ultrasou

21 ft carotids, abdominal aorta, right and left iliofemoral arteries, and coronary arteries.

22 ysis of thrombi with streptokinase in rabbit iliofemoral arteries.

23 a higher incidence of aneurysm formation and iliofemoral artery injury than surgery.

24 ristic models were generated using sheath-to-iliofemoral artery ratios as a variable and SRC as an en

25 s underwent balloon denudation injury of the iliofemoral artery.

26 st-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) following acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

27 Acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis and chronic iliofemoral

28 rolled clinical trial of patients with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis treated with a fixed-do

29 n age 50 +/- 21 years, 52% women) with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis were randomized to rece

30 For patients with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, it remains unclear whe

31 In patients with acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, PCDT did not influence

32 the effect of PCDT in ATTRACT patients with iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis.

33 In a clinical cohort, 41 patients with acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombi underwent MSTI before ca

34 omes of endovascular interventions for acute iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis and chronic iliofemor

35 Iliofemoral disease was the indication for 584 procedure

36 Iliofemoral DVT (n = 221 [71%]) and femoral-popliteal DV

37 at reported the rate of PTS in patients with iliofemoral DVT (symptomatic for <28 days) and early thr

38 Patients with acute iliofemoral DVT represent a subgroup at particularly hig

39 tudy included 31 patients with predominantly iliofemoral DVT treated via catheter-directed thromboasp

40 ne therapy for patients with extensive acute iliofemoral DVT, low expected bleeding risk, and good fu

41 For iliofemoral DVT, QALY gains with PCDT were greater, yiel

42 ine therapy for selected patients with acute iliofemoral DVT.

43 ay be of intermediate value in patients with iliofemoral DVT.

44 omputed tomography (CT) is commonly used for iliofemoral evaluation for transfemoral transcatheter ao

45 roposed as an effective treatment of chronic iliofemoral (I-F) and inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosi

46 insufficiency, especially when the proximal iliofemoral is involved.

47 ction in extension; the superior band of the iliofemoral ligament was best evaluated in the coronal a

48 The inferior band of the iliofemoral ligament was best evaluated in the sagittal,

49 degree of sheath oversizing with respect to iliofemoral minimal artery diameter and female sex are a

50 ), renal (n = 7), mesenteric (n = 2), and/or iliofemoral (n = 9) malperfusion syndrome were included.

51 al thrombectomy is appropriate in those with iliofemoral obstruction, severe symptoms, and a low risk

52 all analyses were stratified by access site (iliofemoral or noniliofemoral).

53 HU) of the aorta and intense enhancement of iliofemoral runoff was achieved without venous contamina

54 Endovenous recanalization of iliofemoral stenosis or occlusion with angioplasty and s

55 Endovascular treatment of flow-limiting iliofemoral stenosis reduces aortic pulsatile load and c

56 gregation, whereas a healthy rabbit model of iliofemoral stent implantation was used to assess re-end

57 ing, four patients underwent placement of an iliofemoral stent, and one patient underwent placement o

58 , 44% (134 of 305) of patients who underwent iliofemoral TAVR and 39% (105 of 266) who underwent SAVR

59 both groups with greater early benefit with iliofemoral TAVR than SAVR (1-month difference, 16.8 poi

60 ly health status benefit with self-expanding iliofemoral TAVR vs SAVR but no difference between group

61 erosis in the carotid, abdominal aortic, and iliofemoral territories by 2-/3-dimensional ultrasound a

62 We evaluated the long-term impact of iliofemoral thrombosis (I-FDVT) on walking capacity, ven

63 than conventional treatment in patients with iliofemoral vein thrombosis.

64 of stent reconstruction of stenotic/occluded iliofemoral veins (IFV) and inferior vena cava (IVC).

65 mbotic, and nonthrombotic obstruction of the iliofemoral veins or inferior vena cava.

66 thrombotic syndrome, stent recanalization of iliofemoral veins or the inferior vena cava can restore

67 rial switch operation (n = 7); 2) those with iliofemoral venous obstruction (n = 6); and 3) those wit

68 Symptomatic iliofemoral venous obstruction can be successfully treat

69 iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis and chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction cause substantial patient

70 iofemoral deep venous thrombosis and chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction in clinical studies and t

71 Iliofemoral venous obstruction is recognized with increa

72 a dedicated endovenous stent for symptomatic iliofemoral venous obstruction.

73 stent placement in patients with symptomatic iliofemoral venous obstruction.

74 dedicated venous stent to treat symptomatic iliofemoral venous obstructions, with reductions in clin

75 Stent placement for iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction results in high t

76 ng Stent System in Patients With Symptomatic Iliofemoral Venous Outflow Obstruction) is a single-arm,

77 in long-term venous patency in patients with iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction.

78 tiveness of stent placement in patients with iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction.

79 s of venous stent placement in patients with iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction.

80 tent system for the treatment of symptomatic iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction.

81 Kaplan-Meier analysis showed primary iliofemoral venous patency rates at 1, 3, and 5 years of

82 ant Chronic Non-Malignant Obstruction of the Iliofemoral Venous Segment) was a prospective, internati

83 ifty-one consecutive patients with extensive iliofemoral venous thrombosis were treated during a 10-y

84 es have reported on conventional therapy for iliofemoral venous thrombosis with disappointing results

85 rtion of candidates for TAVR have inadequate iliofemoral vessels for TF access.