ライフサイエンスコーパス: oronasal

1 all success rate tended to be greater in the oronasal (65.7%) than the nasal group (48.6%), but the d

2 ideofluoroscopic images of the upper airway, oronasal airflow and respiratory inductance plethysmogra

3 The oronasal anatomy (premaxilla-palate-vomer architecture)

4 al sensitivity of the mucus membranes in the oronasal cavities and being perceived as pungency, irrit

5 swine, displaying reduced replication in the oronasal cavity and limited spread from the inoculation

6 se in the respiratory mucosa, triggered upon oronasal challenge and congruent with a memory B-cell re

7 nimals (n = 10) exhibited FMD symptoms after oronasal challenge at 30 dpv.

8 ion synchrotron to interpret features of the oronasal complex pertinent to facial growth.

9 sed greatly enlarged orbits and a haplorhine oronasal configuration by the time they are first docume

10 es (CTLs) in a group of naive cats following oronasal exposure to FeLV.

11 the i.v. group and from 10 to 56 dpi for the oronasal group.

12 Oronasal infection triggered an immune reaction compatib

13 mly received either a disposable nasal or an oronasal mask (Respironics, Pittsburgh, PA) when they me

14 from sebum sampled at the skin surface after oronasal mask application.

15 s significantly higher in the nasal than the oronasal mask group (12 vs. 4, respectively, p=.023).

16 patients in the nasal (11.4%) and two in the oronasal mask group (5.7%) died later during the hospita

17 nasal mask was less well tolerated than the oronasal mask in patients with acute respiratory failure

18 ve mechanical ventilation using facial mask (oronasal mask) failed to reverse acute respiratory failu

19 Despite the induction of specific IgG in the oronasal mucosa, current intramuscular vaccines have lim

20 rstitial pneumonia, with RESTV shedding from oronasal mucosal membranes.

21 bryonic development, palatal shelves display oronasal (O-N) and anteroposterior polarity before the o

22 The lesion scores were higher for oronasal (P=0.0008) and i.v. (P=0.0029) group birds than

23 s a chemosensory or tactile mechanism in the oronasal region of humans for detecting some aspect of t

24 ory tissues of the head (eyes, ears, various oronasal regions), bone, spinal cord, adrenal cortex, an

25 0.05), unchanged maximum flow, and increased oronasal resistance (p < 0.05) in both groups.

26 h flow limitation, maximum inspiratory flow, oronasal resistance, genioglossus muscle activity, and a

27 chicken infectious doses of avian HEV by the oronasal route, group 2 chickens (n=29) were each inocul

28 oconversion and the presence of viral RNA in oronasal secretions and feces.

29 seroconversion, the presence of viral RNA in oronasal secretions, persistence of viral RNA in lymphoi

30 Accumulating evidence indicates that oronasal sensory stimulation influences nutrient metabol

31 xperimental infection studies evaluating the oronasal susceptibility to and transmission of a US H5N1

32 nasal ventilation might be advantageous over oronasal ventilation prior to induction.

33 intraesophageal diaphragm EMG), ventilation (oronasal "ventilation"), and genioglossus EMG activity.

34 our study was to assess patient tolerance of oronasal vs. nasal mask ventilation in acute respiratory