ライフサイエンスコーパス: intra-abdominal

1 oses with lower de-escalation rates included intra-abdominal (23%) and skin and soft tissue (28%) inf

2 ions were the most common (64%), followed by intra-abdominal (26%), orthopaedic (6%), and tropical in

3 roparesis, intra-abdominal fluid collection, intra-abdominal abscess (10% vs 25%, P = 0.027), severe

4 sus no irrigation (NI) reduces postoperative intra-abdominal abscess (IAA) in children with perforate

5 after 90 days included wound infections and intra-abdominal abscess (n = 75) and failure to thrive (

6 (OR, 4.90; 95% CI, 1.41-17.06; P = .01) and intra-abdominal abscess (OR, 7.46; 95% CI, 1.65-33.66; P

7 The third complication was an intra-abdominal abscess after a TV appendectomy.

8 linical symptoms and signs of peritonitis or intra-abdominal abscess and isolation of Candida species

9 s, and postoperative complications including intra-abdominal abscess and pancreatic fistula (all P <

10 OR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.38-2.32; P = .88) or on intra-abdominal abscess development (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0

11 .093), postoperative hemorrhage (P = 0.174), intra-abdominal abscess formation (P = 0.199), biliary l

12 , and secondary outcome was the incidence of intra-abdominal abscess formation.

13 interval [UI] 34.8-36.6) of 10 175 patients, intra-abdominal abscess in 1619 (18.3%, 17.5-19.1) of 88

14 There were no intra-abdominal abscess in either groups.

15 s necessary for maximal virulence in a mouse intra-abdominal abscess model.

16 With CPG-directed care, intra-abdominal abscess rate decreased from 0.24 to 0.10

17 Patients who had an anastomotic leak or intra-abdominal abscess were included in the infection g

18 sible hole, diffuse fibrinopurulent exudate, intra-abdominal abscess, and extraluminal fecalith were

19 Pneumonia, intra-abdominal abscess, and sepsis were the most common

20 inal COS (12): mortality, bowel obstruction, intra-abdominal abscess, recurrent appendicitis, complic

21 ndpoints were postoperative wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, length of hospital

22 f surgery and postoperative wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, or readmission.

23 ileostomy closure (6.5%), trauma (2.7%), and intra-abdominal abscess/other peritonitis (1.9%).

24 r IBD recurrence (n = 66, 12%) or because of intra-abdominal-abscess or fistula (n = 93, 16%).

25 There were no intra-abdominal abscesses or other major complications a

26 RIM101 contributes to persistence within intra-abdominal abscesses, at least in part through acti

27 nly isolated organism from clinical cases of intra-abdominal abscesses, suggesting its potential to i

28 x inflammation did LA significantly increase intra-abdominal abscesses.

29 RT was longer in patients with intra-abdominal adhesions (P = 0.0139) and higher BMI (P

30 nimals in a rat model of severe postsurgical intra-abdominal adhesions, compared with saline controls

31 using AF significantly reduced postsurgical intra-abdominal adhesions.

32 ubcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue (SAAT), intra-abdominal adipose tissue (IAAT), and liver fat wer

33 y (P = 0.01), with a significant increase in intra-abdominal adipose tissue DFA uptake from 0.15 (0.0

34 se association with increased DFA storage in intra-abdominal adipose tissues (r = -0.79, P = 0.05) an

35 podystrophy that is characterized by loss of intra-abdominal and subcutaneous white fat, severe insul

36 d in Europe for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections, as well as

37 erated in a randomized order by inflating an intra-abdominal balloon.

38 lications (new-onset multiple organ failure, intra-abdominal bleeding, enterocutaneous fistula, or pa

39 race, cigarette smoking, and obesity with an intra-abdominal body fat distribution.

40 and found to exhibit improved inhibition of intra-abdominal cancer in two clinically relevant murine

41 The spread of intra-abdominal cancers is a vexing clinical problem for

42 We studied the pathogenesis of intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) in mice that were infe

43 % CI, 1.45-7.93; p = 0.005) or occurrence of intra-abdominal candidiasis (tumor necrosis factor-alpha

44 tor-alpha and an increased susceptibility to intra-abdominal candidiasis in a homogenous prospective

45 The pathogenesis of intra-abdominal candidiasis is poorly understood.

46 A mouse model of intra-abdominal candidiasis is valuable for studying pat

47 Intra-abdominal candidiasis was defined by the presence

48 101 influenced expression of 49 genes during intra-abdominal candidiasis, including previously uniden

49 with significant increases in alimentary and intra-abdominal cases.

50 ss are in the abdominal wall followed by the intra-abdominal cavity, usually in the sub-hepatic or re

51 bolic syndrome with an increase in visceral (intra-abdominal) compared to subcutaneous fat.

52 In MCS, intracranial, intrathoracic and intra-abdominal compartment pressures are interrelated.

53 ; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-24.71], intra-abdominal complications (OR: 3.46; 95% CI: 1.49-8.

54 The incidence and types of intra-abdominal complications after pediatric transplant

55 his technique enables the early diagnosis of intra-abdominal complications such as stenosis, fistulas

56 Intra-abdominal complications were grouped into 4 catego

57 the prognostic assessment of other malignant intra-abdominal conditions; however, there is limited da

58 PV for bloodstream infections was 96.5%, for intra-abdominal cultures was 98.6%, for respiratory cult

59 al of patients with stage I, II, III, and IV intra-abdominal desmoid tumor were 95%, 100%, 89%, and 7

60 system to predict mortality in patients with intra-abdominal desmoid tumors and identified additional

61 evaluate the mortality rate of patients with intra-abdominal desmoid tumors and to identify prognosti

62 A total of 154 patients with intra-abdominal desmoid tumors were included in the stud

63 esistance at least in part through increased intra-abdominal DFA storage and reduced spillover.

64 , elevated body mass index, tobacco use, and intra-abdominal distribution of fat) to detect esophagea

65 There is considerable uncertainty regarding intra-abdominal drainage after pancreatoduodenectomy.

66 Omission of drains was not inferior to intra-abdominal drainage in terms of postoperative reint

67 eaticojejunal anastomosis were randomized to intra-abdominal drainage versus no drainage.

68 Omental milky spots readily concentrate intra-abdominal E. coli where macrophages and recruited

69 Other measures included subcutaneous and intra-abdominal fat from computed tomography scans, weig

70 Intra-abdominal fat is abundantly present in both the pe

71 s to decreased ovarian reserve and increased intra-abdominal fat mass in granddaughters, accompanied

72 ditional port placement because of excessive intra-abdominal fat or limited abdominal domain.

73 Changes in weight and intra-abdominal fat were not significantly different bet

74 ge was associated with a higher incidence of intra-abdominal fluid collection (9% vs 22%, P = 0.0004)

75 ed with a higher incidence of gastroparesis, intra-abdominal fluid collection, intra-abdominal absces

76 ients with blood, bronchoalveolar lavage, or intra-abdominal fluid cultures growing Enterobacter spp,

77 in the control group had minimal amounts of intra-abdominal free fluid.

78 and physiologic disruptions associated with intra-abdominal HIPEC is critical to ensure effective an

79 15 mm Hg), and simultaneous pleural effusion/intra abdominal hypertension.

80 Air-regulated intra-abdominal hypertension (0-25 mm Hg).

81 We included 60 patients, 30 without intra-abdominal hypertension (15 fluid responders and 15

82 al pleural effusion instillation (13 mL/kg), intra-abdominal hypertension (15 mm Hg), and simultaneou

83 ders and 15 fluid nonresponders) and 30 with intra-abdominal hypertension (21 fluid responders and ni

84 ond, and third time periods (p < 0.001), and intra-abdominal hypertension (intra-abdominal pressure >

85 with at least one additional risk factor for intra-abdominal hypertension (multiple trauma, abdominal

86 and DP(TP) were increased by the presence of intra-abdominal hypertension (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0222,

87 sion was 29.8% versus 18.6% in those without intra-abdominal hypertension (p < 0.001).

88 lance was associated with the development of intra-abdominal hypertension after day 1.

89 phylactic use of the open abdomen to prevent intra-abdominal hypertension after DC laparotomy.

90 ) and lung compliance (C(L)), in response to intra-abdominal hypertension and changes in positive end

91 pendently associated with the development of intra-abdominal hypertension at any time during the obse

92 Intra-abdominal hypertension decreased end-expiratory lu

93 Intra-abdominal hypertension decreased end-expiratory tr

94 Intra-abdominal hypertension decreased total respiratory

95 The severity of intra-abdominal hypertension during the first 2 weeks of

96 red) were associated with the development of intra-abdominal hypertension during the first week in th

97 Presence and severity of intra-abdominal hypertension during the observation peri

98 During bilateral lung injury, intra-abdominal hypertension increased both DP(AW) (at p

99 pared with normal intra-abdominal pressures, intra-abdominal hypertension increased DP(AW), during bo

100 Intra-abdominal hypertension is common in critically ill

101 Intra-abdominal hypertension is responsible for some fal

102 patients allows for sufficient detection of intra-abdominal hypertension is unclear.

103 Relief of intra-abdominal hypertension may be instrumental to the

104 Intra-abdominal hypertension may contribute to a poor ou

105 In our mixed ICU patient cohort, intra-abdominal hypertension occurred in almost half of

106 to 7 cm H2O (as documented on the day before intra-abdominal hypertension occurred) were associated w

107 In subjects without intra-abdominal hypertension on day 1, body mass index c

108 nd 90-day mortality, whereas the presence of intra-abdominal hypertension on the day of ICU admission

109 The mortality of patients with intra-abdominal hypertension was 29.8% versus 18.6% in t

110 The severity of intra-abdominal hypertension was as follows: grade I, 47

111 Intra-abdominal hypertension was present in 34.0% of the

112 ural effusion was present and by 184 mL when intra-abdominal hypertension was present.

113 When pleural effusion and intra-abdominal hypertension were simultaneously applied

114 bdominal hypertension- and 20 +/- 6 mm Hg in intra-abdominal hypertension+ patients (p < 0.01).

115 hypertension- patients and 0.60 +/- 0.11 in intra-abdominal hypertension+ patients (p = 0.37 vs 0.5)

116 In intra-abdominal hypertension+ patients with fluid respon

117 Among the nine intra-abdominal hypertension+ patients without fluid res

118 ) in whom fluid expansion was planned, with (intra-abdominal hypertension+) and without (intra-abdomi

119 and without (intra-abdominal hypertension-) intra-abdominal hypertension, defined by an intra-abdomi

120 In a pig model of intra-abdominal hypertension, positive end-expiratory pr

121 al pressure at baseline was 4 +/- 3 mm Hg in intra-abdominal hypertension- and 20 +/- 6 mm Hg in intr

122 ness was 0.98 +/- 0.02 (p < 0.001 vs 0.5) in intra-abdominal hypertension- patients and 0.60 +/- 0.11

123 In intra-abdominal hypertension- patients with fluid respon

124 passive leg raising test was negative in all intra-abdominal hypertension- patients without fluid res

125 14% during passive leg raising (p = 0.01 vs intra-abdominal hypertension- patients) and by 32% +/- 1

126 +/- 18% during volume expansion (p = 0.72 vs intra-abdominal hypertension- patients).

127 (intra-abdominal hypertension+) and without (intra-abdominal hypertension-) intra-abdominal hypertens

128 ions does not increase the detection rate of intra-abdominal hypertension.

129 ng results in an increased detection rate of intra-abdominal hypertension.

130 end-expiratory lung volume decline caused by intra-abdominal hypertension.

131 sociated with the presence or development of intra-abdominal hypertension.

132 greater than 12 mm Hg were defined as having intra-abdominal hypertension.

133 nd LOS, 30-day readmission rates, ileus, and intra-abdominal infection (all P's > .05).

134 in the 0- to 12-month postsurgery period for intra-abdominal infection (aOR, 2.09 [95% CI, 1.78-2.46]

135 ting than procalcitonin for the detection of intra-abdominal infection (areas under the ROC curve: 0.

136 onal Consensus Criteria) due to pneumonia or intra-abdominal infection (cohorts 1-3, n=2534 patients)

137 el of Candida albicans-Staphylococcus aureus intra-abdominal infection (IAI) results in 100% mortalit

138 al of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intra-abdominal infection (STOP-IT), and results suggest

139 erative days 2, 3, 4, and/or 5 as markers of intra-abdominal infection after elective colorectal surg

140 nia, 112 for urinary tract infection, 83 for intra-abdominal infection and 45 for bloodstream infecti

141 ned as reinsertion of nasogastric tube), and intra-abdominal infection and association between colore

142 tive infection assays using animal models of intra-abdominal infection and intestinal colonization.

143 te marker for the detection of postoperative intra-abdominal infection and the appropriate moment to

144 ased after bariatric surgery whereas that of intra-abdominal infection and UTI increased.

145 going emergency gastrointestinal surgery for intra-abdominal infection are at risk of invasive candid

146 cated urinary tract infection or complicated intra-abdominal infection caused by ceftazidime-resistan

147 Intra-abdominal infection decreased from 7.4% to 2.5% (P

148 cated urinary tract infection or complicated intra-abdominal infection due to ceftazidime-resistant G

149 approach to treat septicemia associated with intra-abdominal infection in a murine model by delicatel

150 el of Staphylococcus aureus-Candida albicans intra-abdominal infection results in approximately 60% m

151 The incidence of intra-abdominal infection was 11.8%, with 24.6% of patie

152 en patients with sepsis due to pneumonia and intra-abdominal infection were combined.

153 ep-/-)) mice were generated and subjected to intra-abdominal infection with Klebsiella pneumoniae, wh

154 ary tract infection and ten with complicated intra-abdominal infection) and 148 assigned to best avai

155 nary tract infection and 11 with complicated intra-abdominal infection) were analysed for the primary

156 cus on one site of infection (eg, pneumonia, intra-abdominal infection).

157 sue infection (SSTI), respiratory infection, intra-abdominal infection, or urinary tract infection (U

158 ive care unit patients requiring surgery for intra-abdominal infection.

159 30), bile leakage (4.5% vs 3.1%, P = 0.686), intra-abdominal infections (12.1% vs 10.2%, P = 0.800),

160 sistance among pathogens causing complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) supports the developm

161 adult hospitalized patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs).

162 Polymicrobial intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are clinically prevalen

163 Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) after elective colorec

164 ted urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections (when used with metronidazole

165 egarding the risk of increased postoperative intra-abdominal infections after laparoscopic appendecto

166 ble outcome in community-acquired pneumonia, intra-abdominal infections and bloodstream infections, r

167 Intra-abdominal infections are common in young infants a

168 Intra-abdominal infections are frequent and life-threate

169 Intra-abdominal infections are one of the most common in

170 as highest during natural disaster missions, intra-abdominal infections during hospital support missi

171 penem in 1066 men and women with complicated intra-abdominal infections from 2 identical, randomized,

172 <91 days of age with suspected or confirmed intra-abdominal infections hospitalized in 24 neonatal i

173 linical trials of antibiotics in complicated intra-abdominal infections identified through systematic

174 life-threatening disease via bloodstream and intra-abdominal infections in immunocompromised and tran

175 tibiotic therapy for patients with localized intra-abdominal infections ranging from mild to moderate

176 ls of 5 anti-infective agents in complicated intra-abdominal infections used a source control review

177 ere minor (76%), whereas most operations for intra-abdominal infections were major (98%).

178 Retransplantation and intra-abdominal infections were major risk factors.

179 acy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections) was a prospective, randomize

180 n (eg, complicated urinary tract infections, intra-abdominal infections), yet these designs may not b

181 In clinical trials of complicated intra-abdominal infections, assessment of adequacy of th

182 be a useful adjunct in treating hepatic and intra-abdominal infections.

183 k surgical intensive care unit patients with intra-abdominal infections.

184 biofilms in the gastrointestinal tract, and intra-abdominal infections.

185 atients: 10 with wound infections and 2 with intra-abdominal infections.

186 t activity against pathogens associated with intra-abdominal infections.

187 young infants with suspected or complicated intra-abdominal infections.

188 al superiority of short-duration therapy for intra-abdominal infections.

189 to meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections.

190 Intra-abdominal injection of 2B11.3 hybridoma to NEP25 m

191 hic imaging associated with the diagnosis of intra-abdominal injuries (IAI), as well as review the cu

192 ho require further diagnostic evaluation for intra-abdominal injuries after blunt abdominal trauma.

193 ted tomographic (CT) scans in the ED, missed intra-abdominal injuries, ED length of stay, and hospita

194 %, 95% CI, 4.0% to 7.1%) were diagnosed with intra-abdominal injuries, including 40 (80%; 95% CI, 66%

195 use of resources; ED length of stay; missed intra-abdominal injuries; or hospital charges.

196 tenderness to palpation does not rule out an intra-abdominal injury (summary LR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46-0

197 The prevalence of intra-abdominal injury in adult emergency department pat

198 One case of missed intra-abdominal injury occurred in a patient in the FAST

199 f variables for identifying patients without intra-abdominal injury requires further study.

200 included studies of diagnostic accuracy for intra-abdominal injury that compared at least 1 finding

201 Clinical decision rules are able to predict intra-abdominal injury with high sensitivity.

202 For detection of intra-abdominal injury, FAST sensitivity (Sn) was 0.56,

203 arotomy, autopsy, and/or clinical course for intra-abdominal injury.

204 gs, but a normal result does not rule out an intra-abdominal injury.

205 arding (LR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.3-5.9) suggest an intra-abdominal injury.

206 igs (49.6 +/- 5.8 kg) underwent laparoscopic intra-abdominal insufflation with 14 mm Hg CO2 gas for 6

207 These results suggest a unique intra-abdominal interaction between the host and C. albi

208 pulmonary embolism (11), pneumonia (13), and intra-abdominal lesions (16).

209 (P = .01), blood in the stool (P = .04), and intra-abdominal lymph nodes (P = .001).

210 who developed metastases in the inguinal and intra-abdominal lymph nodes and thigh muscles.

211 of the primary tumor and for the presence of intra-abdominal metastases.

212 ases declined steadily, while alimentary and intra-abdominal operations increased.

213 S) is a surgical concept permitting scarless intra-abdominal operations through natural orifices, suc

214 o the upper body parts at the expense of the intra-abdominal organs associated only with a smaller co

215 After 2 hours of abdominal NRP, the intra-abdominal organs were cold flushed in situ.

216 o the upper body parts at the expense of the intra-abdominal organs.

217 Damage control (DC) with intra-abdominal packing and delayed reconstruction is an

218 dressed the BCRA1/2 carrier lifetime risk of intra-abdominal peritoneal carcinoma from an appendix so

219 ian, non-fallopian tube, nonbreast, positive intra-abdominal peritoneal carcinoma in previously cance

220 y of C. albicans to induce mortality from an intra-abdominal polymicrobial infection.

221 Intra-abdominal polymicrobial infections cause significa

222 to implantation of a cardiac graft into the intra-abdominal position in a baboon recipient for the s

223 Heterotopic cardiac transplantation in the intra-abdominal position in a large animal model has bee

224 < 0.001), and intra-abdominal hypertension (intra-abdominal pressure >/= 12 mm Hg) occurred in 19.9%

225 Four levels of intra-abdominal pressure (baseline, 12, 18, and 22 mm Hg

226 Elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is associated with ICP el

227 Above intra-abdominal pressure 5 mm Hg, plateau airway pressur

228 drainage was inserted in order to reduce the intra-abdominal pressure and enable appropriate ventilat

229 dal ventilation in the presence of increased intra-abdominal pressure and in calculating true transpu

230 cs, and cardiac output 5 mins after each new intra-abdominal pressure and positive end-expiratory pre

231 as well as minimization of intrathoracic and intra-abdominal pressure as clinically possible.

232 The mean intra-abdominal pressure at admission day was an indepen

233 The intra-abdominal pressure at baseline was 4 +/- 3 mm Hg i

234 city was significantly reduced by increasing intra-abdominal pressure at both positive end-expiratory

235 ry lung volume (+119% [p < .001] at 22 mm Hg intra-abdominal pressure compared with 5 cm H2O positive

236 ry lung volume (+233% [p < .001] at 22 mm Hg intra-abdominal pressure compared with 5 cm H2O positive

237 and -8% [p < .05], respectively, at 22 mm Hg intra-abdominal pressure compared with baseline intra-ab

238 High intra-abdominal pressure could enhance the penetration o

239 Subjects with a mean intra-abdominal pressure equal to or greater than 12 mm

240 intra-abdominal hypertension, defined by an intra-abdominal pressure greater than or equal to 12 mm

241 ate positive end-expiratory pressure (= half intra-abdominal pressure in cm H2O + 5 cm H2O), and high

242 and high positive end-expiratory pressure (= intra-abdominal pressure in cm H2O).

243 positive end-expiratory pressure matched to intra-abdominal pressure led to a preservation of end-ex

244 ivided into three subgroups according to the intra-abdominal pressure measurement policy in different

245 Intra-abdominal pressure measurements in predefined at-r

246 dent predictor of mortality in patients with intra-abdominal pressure measurements started within the

247 Whether limiting intra-abdominal pressure measurements to preselected at-

248 We aimed to clarify whether expanded intra-abdominal pressure monitoring results in an increa

249 In patients with intra-abdominal pressure monitoring, the mean intra-abdo

250 tudied, and 1,241 patients (46.0%) underwent intra-abdominal pressure monitoring.

251 hing positive end-expiratory pressure to the intra-abdominal pressure on cardio-respiratory parameter

252 ntra-abdominal pressure monitoring, the mean intra-abdominal pressure on the admission day is an inde

253 Expanding the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure to more than 50% of intensive c

254 positive end-expiratory pressure matched to intra-abdominal pressure to prevent intra-abdominal pres

255 e increased linearly by ~ 50% of the applied intra-abdominal pressure value, associated with commensu

256 Intra-abdominal pressure was measured a minimum of every

257 The intra-abdominal pressure was measured in 31.7%, 55.6%, a

258 The intra-abdominal pressure was significantly higher in ext

259 ra-abdominal pressure compared with baseline intra-abdominal pressure) but did not change cardiac out

260 us, elevated intracranial pressure, elevated intra-abdominal pressure, and therapeutic hypothermia af

261 Indeed, increased intra-abdominal pressure, as an extreme marker of abdomi

262 ission to the ICU was associated with higher intra-abdominal pressure, higher plasma C reactive prote

263 At each level of intra-abdominal pressure, moderate positive end-expirato

264 t fluid, blood and protein losses, increased intra-abdominal pressure, systemic hyperthermia, and inc

265 At each level of intra-abdominal pressure, three levels of positive end-e

266 ring laparoscopic surgery produces increased intra-abdominal pressure, which potentially influences h

267 tched to intra-abdominal pressure to prevent intra-abdominal pressure-induced end-expiratory lung vol

268 s occurred in transpulmonary pressure due to intra-abdominal pressure.

269 al reflux, which may be related to increased intra-abdominal pressure.

270 arying degrees of matching the corresponding intra-abdominal pressure: baseline positive end-expirato

271 anges in positive end-expiratory pressure or intra-abdominal pressures in both conditions.

272 Application of intra-abdominal pressures of 0 and 20 cm H2O at positive

273 ethysmography (OEP), (ii) intra-thoracic and intra-abdominal pressures with a balloon catheter in eac

274 When compared with normal intra-abdominal pressures, intra-abdominal hypertension

275 cent graduates averaged 80 alimentary and 78 intra-abdominal procedures during their CR years.

276 surgically treated IH after 12,000 elective, intra-abdominal procedures to provide more individualize

277 75 mm; P = .008); its length correlated with intra-abdominal (R = 0.35; P = .045) and total abdominal

278 five adults with abdominal injury (46.7%) or intra-abdominal sepsis (52.3%) were randomly allocated t

279 temic inflammation after abdominal injury or intra-abdominal sepsis is associated with poor outcomes.

280 e mouse by modifying a widely adopted murine intra-abdominal sepsis model to engender a phenotype tha

281 In murine intra-abdominal sepsis, pulmonary injury cannot be consi

282 4 mo) mice underwent a cecal slurry model of intra-abdominal sepsis.

283 ith high potential for adjunctive therapy in intra-abdominal sepsis.

284 PS, bacterial lipopeptide, and polymicrobial intra-abdominal sepsis.

285 (ECF), enteroatmospheric fistula (EAF), and intra-abdominal sepsis/abscess (IAS) are major challenge

286 s with severe (n = 21) or non-severe (n = 8) intra-abdominal sepsis; severe (n = 23) or non-severe (n

287 rats, splenorenal shunts (the most prominent intra-abdominal shunts) of BDL rats, and mesentery of sh

288 No intra-abdominal study has demonstrated any advantage for

289 d), and Metastatic (cells implanted on other intra-abdominal surfaces).

290 ncluding 108 patients scheduled for elective intra-abdominal surgeries requiring a nasogastric tube (

291 n for matched pairs showed that a history of intra-abdominal surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 2.865; 95% co

292 ntrolled trials in patients undergoing major intra-abdominal surgery have challenged the historical u

293 to collect data from 50 patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgical interventions [40 men, 10 women

294 Here, we show that intra-abdominal treatment of mice with 12,13-diHOME incr

295 ation include large desmoid tumors and other intra-abdominal tumors with reasonable expectation of po

296 imits the use of radiation for patients with intra-abdominal tumors.

297 groups, we compared adiposity of the trunk, intra-abdominal visceral cavity, and liver, adjusting fo

298 ing that DKO mice may become more reliant on intra-abdominal WAT to supply lipid for oxidation.

299 Analysis of intra-abdominal white adipose tissue (epididymal WAT) sh

300 1% reduction in TFAM in the subcutaneous and intra-abdominal white adipose tissue (WAT) and interscap