ライフサイエンスコーパス: ischemia time

1 t delays to a PCI-capable facility (incurred ischemia time).

2 at cardiac allografts subjected to prolonged ischemia time.

3 the larger/deeper the tumor, the longer the ischemia time.

4 iversity of Wisconsin solution and 6-hr cold ischemia time.

5 ), particularly in regards to decreased warm ischemia time.

6 rs can be made without unduly increasing the ischemia time.

7 h donor BMI >30 (P=0.06) and increasing cold-ischemia time.

8 nors (n = 14) matched for age, BMI, and cold ischemia time.

9 n mismatch, pretransplant dialysis, and cold ischemia time.

10 m closure and hemostasis with a limited warm ischemia time.

11 or type, HLA mismatches, donor age, and cold ischemia time.

12 onor, PRA as a continuous variable, and cold ischemia time.

13 CD14 mRNA correlated with the length of cold ischemia time.

14 t have significantly altered expression with ischemia time.

15 -term graft survival despite increasing cold ischemia time.

16 zed patients in spite of similar length cold ischemia time.

17 alent in cadaveric allografts with long cold ischemia time.

18 aminase, UNOS status, donor gender, and warm ischemia time.

19 ables included age, weight, gender, and cold ischemia time.

20 terms of recipient sex, race, age, and cold ischemia time.

21 xamined for age, sex, and pretransplantation ischemia time.

22 on, use of anti-lymphocyte agents, and graft ischemia time.

23 athology in allografts with 0.5 hour of cold-ischemia time.

24 r delayed allocation beyond 36 hours of cold ischemia time.

25 enriched in DCD donors after the first warm ischemia time.

26 ty of life, shorter operating time, and warm ischemia time.

27 eys, which is susceptible to changes in warm ischemia times.

28 and significantly decreased with longer warm ischemia times.

29 en group but nonsignificantly different warm ischemia times.

30 der, more mismatched donors with longer cold ischemia times.

31 ospital stay, immunosuppressive regimen, and ischemia times.

32 in grafts from older donors and longer cold ischemia times.

33 ytokines appear to require extended visceral ischemia times.

34 rded because of older donor age or long warm ischemia times.

35 = .04) and warm (46 vs 41 minutes; P < .001) ischemia times.

36 f delayed graft function (38% vs. 26%), cold ischemia times (12.9 vs. 13.5 hr), and graft survival wa

37 rations of perfusion (1 and 24 hr), and warm ischemia times (15 and 45 min).

38 an operative time was 159 (54) minutes, warm ischemia time 180 (90) seconds, estimated blood loss 50

39 ean, 159 vs. 188 min; P<0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (2 vs. 5 min; P<0.001) and a lower intraop

40 er circulatory death (DCD, n = 36, mean warm ischemia time = 2 min) and donation after brain death (D

41 time (571 vs. 471 days, P<0.01), longer cold ischemia time (22 vs. 20 hr, P<0.01), and donor and reci

42 are as follows: operative time 4.5 hr, warm ischemia time 25 min, and blood transfused (packed red b

43 th recipients of kidneys with a shorter cold ischemia time (3.2%).

44 g from donors after brain death (median cold ischemia time 33 +/- 36.9 hours) and 5 being from donors

45 up, kidneys with diffuse GFT had longer cold ischemia time (34 versus 27 h), were more frequently pum

46 stimated blood loss 344.2 +/- 690.3 mL, warm ischemia time 4.9 +/- 3.4 minutes, and donor length of s

47 We found that a prolonged cold ischemia time (6-12 hr) alone did not induce IE.

48 iver Disease score was 15 (IQR, 11-21); cold ischemia time, 8.0 hours (IQR, 6.4-9.7 hours); MEAF, 4 (

49 r remaining in situ for 120 min (30-min warm ischemia time, 90-min cold ischemia time), the second ki

50 s of panel-reactive antibodies, shorter cold ischemia times, a lower incidence of delayed graft funct

51 Increased donor age and cold ischemia time additionally decreased graft survival, whe

52 o the effect of each hour of additional cold ischemia time (adjusted HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.05; P < 0

53 donor organ was subjected to 1 hour of warm ischemia time after circulatory cessation, then flushed

54 Ischemia times along with other tumor/recipient variable

55 th DDK with non-DGF after adjusting for cold ischemia time (alpha=0.001).

56 s of kidneys with less than 12 hours of cold ischemia time and 74,997 dollars for those with more tha

57 donors, and is associated with a longer cold ischemia time and a potentially higher rejection rate.

58 Warm ischemia time and cold ischemia times were 38 and 466 mi

59 factors for reduced graft survival are cold ischemia time and donor age.

60 yzed following challenge with 45 min of warm ischemia time and either 4 h of reperfusion or 24 h of c

61 l as clinical factors, such as cold and warm ischemia time and HLA mismatch.

62 Ischemia time and its components (transport time and sur

63 Longer cold ischemia time and large droplet macrovesicular steatosis

64 e reallocated without delay to minimize cold ischemia time and maximize the utility of the graft.

65 s showed no significant differences for warm ischemia time and other donor outcomes, delayed graft fu

66 he standard FXM, potentially shortening cold ischemia time and providing clinicians with unambiguous

67 intrahepatic strictures, and prolonged cold ischemia time and rejection were associated with stone o

68 When results were adjusted for cold ischemia time and sex, iNO significantly decreased hospi

69 PST is not correlated with ischemia time and should not be used as a surrogate of p

70 Non-treated allogeneic grafts without cold ischemia time and syngeneic grafts did not develop any T

71 The short tolerable cold ischemia time and the importance of other risk factors h

72 ective cross-match as a means to reduce cold ischemia time and the incidence of delayed graft functio

73 SLD grafts also had significantly longer ischemia times and a higher incidence of graft loss owin

74 llocation variance designed to minimize cold ischemia times and encourage adoption of DCD protocols a

75 VI, whereas there was no association between ischemia times and HCC recurrence in patients with no VI

76 tion was found between prolonged total graft ischemia times and primary graft failure or survival fol

77 It abolishes ex vivo benching and prolonged ischemia times and provides two optimal grafts with hemo

78 ocused on graft damage due to prolonged cold ischemia times and rewarming during the long benching pr

79 y allograft dysfunction with increasing cold ischemia times and should be transplanted within 12 hr.

80 We herein investigate critical ischemia times and the effect of novel preservation solu

81 by incorporating duration of symptoms (fixed ischemia time) and anticipated transport delays to a PCI

82 with early transplant stressors (e.g., cold ischemia time) and donor aging.

83 body titer, extent of HLA matching, and cold-ischemia time), and post-transplantation variables (pres

84 gnificant factors such as HLA mismatch, cold ischemia time, and African-American or diabetic recipien

85 l sepsis) and donor factors (donor age, cold ischemia time, and donor cytomegalovirus status), modes

86 an leukocyte antigen-B and DR mismatch, cold ischemia time, and double or en bloc transplant.

87 l demographics included operative time, warm ischemia time, and estimated blood loss.

88 lanted, increment of insulin secretion, cold ischemia time, and exocrine tissue volume transplanted,

89 score, patient age, pretransplant bilirubin, ischemia time, and operative blood loss were not signifi

90 t survival is affected by donor gender, warm ischemia time, and pretransplant patient condition.

91 include both nonimmunologic (donor age, cold ischemia time, and recipient race) and immunologic facto

92 recipient and donor race and donor age, cold ischemia time, and the pretransplantation use of either

93 hat received a liver graft with a 16-hr cold ischemia time, and the survival rate was 83% after 5 day

94 fects of this system on graft survival, cold ischemia time, and the transplantation of highly sensiti

95 ity, cause of liver disease, donor age, cold ischemia time, and waiting time.

96 , use of anti-lymphocyte preparations, graft ischemia time, and year of transplant were evenly distri

97 cute rejection; and donor age and race, cold ischemia time, and year of transplant.

98 ocured from older donors and had longer warm ischemia times, and consequently achieved higher utiliza

99 CD grafts are discarded because of long warm ischemia times, and the absence of reliable measure of k

100 oved patient selection and reduction in cold ischemia time appear to be contributing factors.

101 vel, donor length of hospital stay, and warm ischemia time approached significance.

102 rough rewarming) divided by calculated total ischemia time (approximate time of arrest [9-1-1 call or

103 Bilirubin and cold ischemia time are crucial for graft outcome post-LT.

104 Efforts to minimize ischemia time are important for long-term renal function

105 Amount of kidney excised and ischemia time are inseparably interlinked; the larger/de

106 othermia should be considered if longer warm ischemia times are anticipated (i.e. >25 min).

107 se retrieved from cadaver donors, where cold ischemia times are significantly longer.

108 mediation analysis was used to evaluate warm ischemia time as a potential mediator of this associatio

109 ican American ethnicity, donor age, and cold ischemia time as predictors of graft and patient surviva

110 .9) and warm (>50 minutes; P=0.003; HR=2.84) ischemia times as independent risk factors for HCC recur

111 Outcomes evaluated were operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, donor complications, length

112 mplications, conversions, operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, length of hospital stay, pai

113 er donor age, male donors, and a longer cold ischemia time but not donor terminal creatinine were ind

114 The HGM Program resulted in longer ischemia times, but graft survival was not affected.

115 rectomy group had shorter operative and warm ischemia times by 52 minutes (P < 0.001) and 102 seconds

116 iver Disease score, and longer warm and cold ischemia times (C statistic, 0.75).

117 rs, whereas donor age, gender and race, cold ischemia time, cadaveric versus living donor, delay in i

118 t this risk was limited to kidneys with cold ischemia time (CIT) >12 hours.

119 non-AA donor (HR 1.66, P < 0.001), and cold ischemia time (CIT) (HR 1.03 per hour >8 hours, P = 0.03

120 ) and kidneys with longer than 30 hr of cold ischemia time (CIT) (OR, 0.95; per 5% increment; 95% CI,

121 Prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) affected BT rate significantly (CIT>

122 cal findings, suboptimal biopsies, long cold ischemia time (CIT) and/or poor hypothermic perfusion pa

123 Cadaveric kidneys experiencing longer cold ischemia time (CIT) are associated with higher levels of

124 We used cold ischemia time (CIT) as an instrument to test the hypothe

125 mulative recurrence curves according to cold ischemia time (CIT) at 2-hour intervals and warm ischemi

126 While the current maximum cold ischemia time (CIT) for donor lungs in clinical LTx is a

127 Prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) is associated with a significant ris

128 (40) and in multivariate analysis only cold ischemia time (CIT) longer than 8 hours (hazard ratio [H

129 zing "modifiable risk factors," such as cold ischemia time (CIT) recipient warm ischemia time (WIT) a

130 Cold ischemia time (CIT) was 10.8 +/- 4.1 hours and anastomos

131 The potential exists for an increase in cold ischemia time (CIT) with resulting increases in delayed

132 The effect of this policy on cold ischemia time (CIT), delayed graft function (DGF), and t

133 iates in both groups, while donor race, cold ischemia time (CIT), female to male transplants, and rec

134 Imported pancreata accumulate cold ischemia time (CIT), limiting utilization and worsening

135 ated in addition to causes of prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT).

136 e, donor warm ischemia time (DWIT), and cold ischemia time (CIT).

137 criteria and the requirement for short cold-ischemia time (CIT).

138 entage of transplanted ECD kidneys with cold ischemia times (CIT) <12 hr increased significantly; the

139 Concerns remain over prolonged cold ischemia times (CIT) associated with shipping kidneys lo

140 r short (3 hr; control) or long (18 hr) cold ischemia times (CIT).

141 omena, such as donor death and possibly cold ischemia time, contributed to differences in complement

142 hereas moderate-to-severe macrosteatosis and ischemia time decreased.

143 used to measure the relationships among cold ischemia time, delayed graft function, acute rejection,

144 Primary outcomes were discard, cold-ischemia time, delayed graft function, and 1-year graft

145 dy more than 0%, cytomegalovirus D+/R-, cold ischemia time, delayed graft function, induction with an

146 Ischemia time-dependently decreased cardiac BH(4) conten

147 st-transplant, allografts with a 6 hour cold-ischemia time developed extensive glomerular injury comp

148 antation model grafts subjected to long cold ischemia time developed severe TV with intimal hyperplas

149 es, including donor brain death, longer cold ischemia time, diabetogenic immunosuppression, and auto-

150 no-flow time, functional warm time, and cold ischemia time did not affect the risk of PNF or poor ren

151 Longer (120 min) ischemia times did not affect the number of apoptotic ce

152 o significant differences in donor age, cold ischemia time, digestion time, or weight of the pancreas

153 nel-reactive antibody level, HLA match, cold ischemia time, donor age, and expanded criteria donation

154 Cold ischemia times, donor age, and preoperative eGFR for tho

155 d include the vital importance of donor warm ischemia time (DWIT) on outcome for both recipients as w

156 us at transplantation, donor age, donor warm ischemia time (DWIT), and cold ischemia time (CIT).

157 Cadaveric transplants, prolonged cold ischemia time, elevated panel reactive antibody, and rec

158 panded criteria donor kidney (15%), and cold ischemia time exceeding 24 hr (27%).

159 rating room time (207 vs. 200 min.), or cold ischemia time (excluding pancreas).

160 Earlier transplantations, shorter ischemia times, female, older, hepatitis C virus positiv

161 The mean cold ischemia time for both groups was 11 +/-3 hr.

162 art of surgery (25 vs. 77 min), shorter cold ischemia time for recovered pancreases (355 vs. 630 min)

163 nd-stage liver disease score, steatosis, and ischemia times for the peak or terminal serum sodium gro

164 In patients with embolization, the warm ischemia time (from embolization to removal of the graft

165 donor body mass index >30 and pancreas cold ischemia time greater than 12 hr.

166 Recipients of kidneys with cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr also had a higher throm

167 For CAD kidney recipients, organ cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr increased the risk for

168 (HLA) mismatches, increased donor age, cold ischemia time greater than 24 hr, African American recip

169 ts, retransplant recipients, donor age, warm ischemia time greater than 30 minutes and cold ischemic

170 t, donor age greater than 55 years, and cold ischemia time greater than 550 minutes were significant

171 race, Kidney Donor Profile Index > 50%, cold ischemia time > 24 hours) and low-risk (not having any r

172 reactive, donation after cardiac death, cold ischemia time >12 hours, ICU stay >5 days, 3 or more pre

173 Donor age >50 years, BMI >30, warm ischemia time >25 minutes, ITU stay >7 days and ALT >/=

174 nor age >55 yr, non-heartbeating donor, cold ischemia time >36 h, and donor hypertension or diabetes

175 <60 mL/min/1.73m, PELD >25 points, and warm ischemia time >60 minutes.

176 years), donor hospital stay (>5 days), cold ischemia time (>10 hours), and warm ischemia time (>40 m

177 3 months posttransplant were prolonged cold ischemia time (>36 hours, odds ratio [OR]=3.38 vs. 0-36

178 s), cold ischemia time (>10 hours), and warm ischemia time (>40 minutes).

179 re common in patients with extended visceral ischemia times (>40 mins).

180 f sensitization, retransplantation, and cold ischemia time; however, EBK recipients were somewhat bet

181 correlation between apoptosis rate and cold ischemia time in CAD (r=0.86, P<0.001) renal allografts.

182 hat received a liver graft with a 16-hr cold ischemia time in Euro-Collins solution survived for more

183 5 years with a nearly 50% reduction of warm ischemia time in experienced hands.

184 reservation and baseline renal function over ischemia time in impacting post-partial nephrectomy func

185 4.6 years (range: 0.7-50), and the mean cold ischemia time in the cadaveric cases was 26.5+/-8.8 hr.

186 Ischemia times in vascularized composite allotransplanta

187 Older recipient age and prolonged cold ischemia time increase the risk of graft failure.

188 The median total ischemia time increased from 171 min (interquartile rang

189 Increased total ischemia time induced greater IL-8 expression during rep

190 cute ischemia predicted by the acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument (ACI-TIP

191 lities emerged in donor selection (age, cold ischemia time, intensive care unit length, amylase conce

192 Ischemia time is a risk factor for mortality after heart

193 Prolonged ischemia time is adversely associated with primary graft

194 In the clinic, donor cardiac graft ischemia time is limited to within a few hours and corre

195 ality are surgically nonmodifiable; however, ischemia time is.

196 d operative time, islet isolation time, warm ischemia time, islet equivalent (IE) counts, estimated b

197 and only 3% were listed as requiring a cold ischemia time less than 6 hours.

198 specific antibody, negative crossmatch, warm ischemia time less than 60 min, absence of recipient spl

199 es, human leukocyte antigen antibodies, cold ischemia time, living donor, and preemptive transplantat

200 nefits of sustained euglycemia, shorter cold ischemia times, lower rates of sensitization, and early

201 Reducing ischemia time may be a useful strategy to decrease HCC r

202 There was no difference regarding cold ischemia time, model for end-stage liver disease score,

203 I 1.23-2.02, P<0.001), and kidneys with cold ischemia time more than 24 hr (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.65

204 CI 1.20-1.30, P=0.002) and kidneys with cold ischemia time more than 24 hr (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-2.00

205 onation after brain death (DBD, n = 76, warm ischemia time = none) were collected.

206 ed recipient BMI (P = 0.046), recipient warm ischemia time (odds ratio, OR, 1.032; 95% CI, 1.008-1.05

207 n estimated blood loss of 85.7 mL and a warm ischemia time of 116.0 seconds.

208 sed using this technique after a median cold ischemia time of 13 h 19 min.

209 kidney from extended criteria donors, a cold ischemia time of more than 30 hr, time of surgical proce

210 The cold-ischemia time of the donor hand was 310 minutes.

211 Mean warm ischemia time of the pancreas graft was 34 min.

212 Groups were divided into ischemia times of 45, 55, and 65min; each group was furt

213 ncluding those of cadaveric grafts with cold ischemia times of as long as 41 hr.

214 not spatial learning with increasing hypoxia-ischemia time on P10 in this model system.

215 Duration of surgery, warm ischemia time, operative blood loss, conversion, and com

216 associated with an increase (P>0.3) in total ischemia time, operative time, and packed red blood cell

217 unassociated with 0Pre biopsy findings, cold ischemia time, or peak PT values.

218 s in recipient demographics, donor age, cold ischemia time, or total number of doses of Thymoglobulin

219 t times can impact logistics as well as cold ischemia time; our findings motivate an exploration of c

220 eduction in use of donors with extended cold ischemia time (p = 0.04) and private pay recipients (p =

221 ry complications (P = 0.04), and short total ischemia time (P = 0.05).

222 Bilirubin (P=0.006) and cold ischemia time (P=0.002) were predictive of graft loss at

223 e associated with shorter operative and warm ischemia times, patients undergoing laparoscopic nephrec

224 pancreata have not been used because of long ischemia times postprocurement.

225 for planning surgery and also decreases cold ischemia time, potentially translating into a higher suc

226 reas after kidney recipients, prolonged cold-ischemia time, prolonged donor hypotension, non-heart-be

227 uate differential gene expression because of ischemia time, prostate samples were divided into five t

228 ge (r = -0.27662, p = 0.0016), cold and warm ischemia time (r = -0.25204, p = 0.0082; r = -0.19778, p

229 negative association to DeltaCP/GCr was cold ischemia time (r=-0.330, P<0.001).

230 Sex, ischemia time, race, previous transplant, donor type, ne

231 ble models, each controlling for donor type, ischemia time, recipient age, use of antilymphocyte agen

232 al origin of procurement team, pancreas cold ischemia time, recipient cerebrovascular disease.

233 Longer cold/warm ischemia time, recipient/donor hypertension, and having

234 ffered in age, pretransplantation diagnosis, ischemia time, renal function, donor Toxoplasma serology

235 Cold as well as warm ischemia time resulted in a significant decrease in cell

236 al anastomosis; use of ureteral stent; total ischemia time; serum creatinine on discharge; and need f

237 Ischemia time should be considered in organ allocation a

238 he paucity of suitable recipients, prolonged ischemia time should not preclude transplantation.

239 bility and thereby increase donor organ cold ischemia time that might then result in increased risk o

240 e U.S. study had a significantly longer cold ischemia time (the time elapsed between procurement of t

241 min (30-min warm ischemia time, 90-min cold ischemia time), the second kidney was removed (NHBD), fl

242 panel-reactive antibodies, and cold and warm ischemia time, the odds of oliguria were 1.60 (1.14 to 2

243 Assuming no change is cold ischemia time, the potential number of 0 CREG, 0 DR mm,

244 of 0-MM kidneys significantly increased cold ischemia time, the risk of graft loss was significantly

245 control groups were similar with respect to ischemia time, the size of the area at risk, and the eje

246 ctive antibody, delayed graft function, cold ischemia time, time since start of dialysis, etiology of

247 low time to <30 minutes, and functional warm ischemia time to <150 minutes.

248 grafts were transplanted with a shorter cold ischemia time to more poorly HLA-matched recipients.

249 perioperative characteristics, such as warm ischemia time, to levels comparable to open surgery.

250 donor/recipient case-mix and increased cold ischemia times under the Kidney Allocation System (KAS),

251 tory death report good outcomes despite warm ischemia times up to 57 minutes.

252 adjusting for recipient and donor age, cold ischemia time, urine output, and Scr.

253 Within this range of cold ischemia time, UW and HTK demonstrate similar efficacy i

254 hyma (influenced by surgical technique), and ischemia time (warm or cold) determines the ultimate fun

255 Mean kidney cold ischemia time was 10 +/- 3 and 50 +/- 15 hours, for grou

256 The median cold ischemia time was 12 h 30 min (range 5 h 25 min-18 h 22

257 ntigen (HLA) match was one; and average cold ischemia time was 12 hours.

258 asystole was 15.9+/-1.9 min and overall warm ischemia time was 12.5+/-1.0 min.

259 the marginal group, the cutoff value of cold ischemia time was 12.6 hr.

260 an hospital stay was 3.2 days, and mean warm ischemia time was 123.3 seconds.

261 Cold ischemia time was 13.6 +/- 4.7 hours; anastomosis time w

262 Mean functional warm ischemia time was 135 minutes.

263 Mean cold ischemia time was 14 hours.

264 Mean warm ischemia time was 14.7 minutes (range, 7-40 minutes).

265 The warm ischemia time was 21 minutes, and the cold ischemia was

266 Median total ischemia time was 213 min (range, 127-222 min).

267 Mean cold ischemia time was 26.9+/-8.6 hr.

268 In cadaveric grafts, the mean cold ischemia time was 29.0 hours +/- 6.9 in those with TRAS

269 Mean warm ischemia time was 3 minutes after laparoscopic harvest.

270 The mean cold ischemia time was 30.5+/-9.2 hr.

271 solation time was 185 (37) minutes, and warm ischemia time was 51 (62) minutes.

272 reatic excision was 34 minutes, whereas cold ischemia time was 6 hours and 40 minutes.

273 Average warm ischemia time was 76 minutes.

274 Mean cold ischemia time was 8.5 hr.

275 Cold ischemia time was a predictor of DGF independently of th

276 Length of ischemia time was correlated with early and sustained pr

277 ventional group, although operative time and ischemia time was higher in minimally invasive group, th

278 Cold ischemia time was longer in those with recurrent stenosi

279 Cold ischemia time was not found to be an important factor in

280 vs. 3.0+/-0.7 hours, P <0.04), whereas warm ischemia time was shorter (3:55+/-1:47 vs. 4:55+/-0:55 m

281 Warm ischemia time was shorter in the piggyback group and ide

282 xpressing either P-selectin or vWF, the cold ischemia time was significantly longer (885 +/- 123 min

283 rienced early acute rejection, the mean cold ischemia time was significantly longer than in allograft

284 Cold ischemia time was strongly associated with DGF, with a 2

285 Per minute increase in warm ischemia time was the only significant risk factor for B

286 ifference, donor gender, donor type, or cold ischemia time were comparable.

287 ent) when the potential costs of longer cold ischemia time were considered.

288 because the additional costs of longer cold ischemia time were greater than the advantages of optimi

289 talization at time of OLT, and cold and warm ischemia time were independent predictors of survival.

290 Lactated Ringer's solution and 3-hr cold ischemia time were used for mechanistic investigations,

291 Warm ischemia time and cold ischemia times were 38 and 466 minutes, respectively.

292 Mean cold ischemia times were less than 20 hr.

293 Mean ischemia times were significantly longer in the Celsior

294 e (PT), retransplantation, and warm and cold ischemia times, were applied to the UNOS database.

295 among the groups with the exception of cold ischemia time, which was longer in the MP group compared

296 ficant increase in door-to-balloon and total ischemia times, which may have contributed to the higher

297 proving renal cooling or shortening the warm ischemia time will expand its indications further.

298 h as cold ischemia time (CIT) recipient warm ischemia time (WIT) and the use of thrombolytic flush at

299 emia time (CIT) at 2-hour intervals and warm ischemia time (WIT) at 10-minute intervals showed that C

300 In the HCV+ cohort, recipient race, warm ischemia time (WIT), and diabetes also independently pre

301 inine excretion, TIMP-2/mOsm, and total warm ischemia time with an AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interv