ライフサイエンスコーパス: radiation exposure

1 llary oxygen saturation [SpO2] and increased radiation exposure).

2 only regarded as a method that causes a high radiation exposure.

3 to determine whether radial access increases radiation exposure.

4 nique is the absence of DNA damage caused by radiation exposure.

5 provement (QI) initiatives to reduce patient radiation exposure.

6 DNA lesions resulting from ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure.

7 he shortest time and with the lowest patient radiation exposure.

8 age interpretation and justify the resulting radiation exposure.

9 etter inform safe levels of chronic low-dose radiation exposure.

10 FA undergoing alternative donor HCT without radiation exposure.

11 95% CI, 12.0- to 127.9-fold), relative to no radiation exposure.

12 emoglobin and albumin levels decreased after radiation exposure.

13 w from 24 h and beyond after lethal doses of radiation exposure.

14 ts underwent whole-body scanning to estimate radiation exposure.

15 ol/L during periods of minimal ultraviolet B radiation exposure.

16 , with improved prognostic accuracy and less radiation exposure.

17 rrelate them with the length of occupational radiation exposure.

18 rally focuses the cells, ensuring consistent radiation exposure.

19 sociated with significantly higher levels of radiation exposure.

20 erstanding of the biological consequences of radiation exposure.

21 ination and sensitizes the cells to ionizing radiation exposure.

22 oup 4 patients seem to benefit from limiting radiation exposure.

23 may be a new therapeutic target for ionizing radiation exposure.

24 oregistration, motion correction, and reduce radiation exposure.

25 elated VT ablation resulted in low levels of radiation exposure.

26 ed before 1940 is likely due to occupational radiation exposure.

27 zation that did not show obstructive CAD and radiation exposure.

28 adolescents from potential risks of ionizing radiation exposure.

29 of the highest levels of annual occupational radiation exposure.

30 tances, including health issues unrelated to radiation exposure.

31 graphy (CT) owing to concerns about ionizing radiation exposure.

32 a novel surgical cap in reducing operators' radiation exposure.

33 of diagnostic quality while reducing patient radiation exposure.

34 and have delivered the cells within 24 h of radiation exposure.

35 d to reduce unnecessary healthcare costs and radiation exposure.

36 City, KS) designed to protect the head from radiation exposure.

37 uded death, major cardiovascular events, and radiation exposure.

38 ay potentially be more sensitive to low-dose radiation exposure.

39 med at mitigating the toxicities of ionizing radiation exposure.

40 zed by the clinical decision rule and spared radiation exposure.

41 in lungs from older patients with CF without radiation exposure.

42 by combining depletion of Lgr5(+) ISCs with radiation exposure.

43 on, which may therefore be omitted to reduce radiation exposure.

44 thod with high accuracy and without ionizing radiation exposure.

45 however, comes with risk related to ionizing radiation exposure.

46 , without the need for additional imaging or radiation exposure.

47 essels but may result in increased noise and radiation exposure.

48 ing microgravity (by hindlimb unloading) and radiation exposure.

49 ion (on host or bacteria) imposed by chronic radiation exposure.

50 e appendicitis has raised concerns regarding radiation exposure.

51 sed to ionizing radiation up to 8 days after radiation exposure.

52 hose with a decreased GFR, experience higher radiation exposure.

53 surveillance may potentially reduce lifetime radiation exposure.

54 from the deleterious effects of ultraviolet radiation exposure.

55 and resulted in reduced fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure.

56 teins are candidate biomarkers for measuring radiation exposure.

57 asure to mitigate H-ARS following accidental radiation exposure.

58 , complications rates, procedure duration or radiation exposure.

59 ched for clustered mutations, a signature of radiation exposure.

60 ts of high dietary iron (650 mg/kg diet) and radiation exposure (0.375 Gy cesium-137 every other day

61 procedure duration (15% increase, p = 0.05), radiation exposure (33% increase, p < 0.0001) and contra

62 the above metrics and significantly reduced radiation exposure (5.5 +/- 4.4 vs. 12.5 +/- 2.7 mSv, P

63 .001), diagnostic certainty (p < 0.001), and radiation exposure (6.1 +/- 0.4 mSv vs. 13.4 +/- 3.2 mSv

64 NI directly controls radiation exposure; a higher NI allows for greater image

65 at in 2011-2012, to determine variability in radiation exposure according to facility for this indica

66 er the linear no-threshold model of ionizing radiation exposure accurately predicts the subsequent in

67 entified correlations between rosacea and UV radiation exposure, alcohol, smoking, skin cancer histor

68 UVB radiation exposure also increased cell growth as assesse

69 d the cap reduced significantly the operator radiation exposure and can be easily incorporated into c

70 anagement strategies, can reduce unnecessary radiation exposure and cost in low-risk patients with sy

71 probability and prescriptive advice reduced radiation exposure and cost of care in low-risk ambulato

72 s associated with a significant reduction of radiation exposure and cumulative costs (59% and 24%, re

73 tin factors H2AX and KAP1 following ionizing radiation exposure and drives local chromatin decondensa

74 Given concerns regarding excess radiation exposure and financial burden, our aim was to

75 e expression of GATA down-stream genes after radiation exposure and identified that AAP4, AAP5 and UR

76 tio suggests that this approach could reduce radiation exposure and improve the ability to view small

77 Risks of whole-body CT include high radiation exposure and iodine contrast agent, but its ef

78 or breast cancer results in variable cardiac radiation exposure and may increase the risk of HF.

79 en with a T-cell-depleted graft to eliminate radiation exposure and minimize early and late toxicitie

80 The mean latency between radiation exposure and onset of RIM was 15 years (range

81 d controlled in order to ensure reduction of radiation exposure and optimization of image quality.

82 high RRS patients, respectively, to minimize radiation exposure and optimize cost/resource utilizatio

83 terative reconstruction (IR) with changes in radiation exposure and phantom size.

84 Secondary outcomes were operator radiation exposure and procedural time.

85 n occurs in many immune cell types following radiation exposure and that allopurinol prevented radiat

86 hiatrists are consistent with known risks of radiation exposure and the changes in radiation exposure

87 O MRI are valuable tools in mapping regional radiation exposure and the effects of radiation on BM.

88 resistance of E. dermatitidis to acute gamma-radiation exposure and the major mechanisms it uses to r

89 ared with MPI, CCTA was associated with less radiation exposure and with a more positive patient expe

90 Although the baseline radiation exposures and exact percent decrease varied ac

91 ing, invasive procedures, clinical outcomes, radiation exposure, and cumulative costs rather than the

92 r point to an important role for ultraviolet radiation exposure, and cyclosporine and azathioprine ma

93 ronary arteries with high image quality, low radiation exposure, and high diagnostic accuracy in pati

94 iven the lack of significant toxicity, lower radiation exposure, and improved accuracy compared with

95 nstitutions can target initiatives, reducing radiation exposure, and increasing patient safety.

96 ity, time to diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, radiation exposure, and overall cost.

97 Stress, in the form of infections, radiation exposure, and steroids, impairs thymic epithel

98 Orthopedic strain and radiation exposure are recognized risk factors in person

99 during the D. radiodurans response to gamma radiation exposure are unknown.

100 l delivery to and uptake by cells in tissue, radiation exposures are often highly nonuniform.

101 istance observed suggests MOFs can withstand radiation exposure at doses found in nuclear waste strea

102 and devices are effective to reduce operator radiation exposure at thorax level during percutaneous c

103 Differential effects were observed following radiation exposure between the two cell lines.

104 Our aim was therefore to compare radiation exposure between transradial access and transf

105 At present relatively low radiation exposures, breast shielding contributed to an

106 for robust intestinal regeneration following radiation exposure but are dispensable for premalignant

107 sed clonogenic survival following subsequent radiation exposure but increased sensitivity to Docetaxe

108 atter grid (ASG) removal is used to decrease radiation exposure but may reduce image quality.

109 The open arc cone-beam CT radiation exposure by means of weighted CT index was sli

110 nd in PCa lesions as well as to evaluate the radiation exposure by the radioligand in PET imaging.

111 Reduction of up to 62.5% in radiation exposure by using SAFIRE-3 yielded similar rea

112 We estimated external radiation exposure by using thermoluminescent dosimeters

113 ought to provide more precise and individual radiation exposure calculation using image based Monte C

114 h administration of lower doses; unnecessary radiation exposure can be avoided by administering doses

115 Accidental or deliberate ionizing radiation exposure can be fatal due to widespread hemato

116 of these data is that environmental stress (radiation exposure) can constrain the natural spatial an

117 ct/kg; uGy*m(2)/kg) and reported by expected radiation exposure categories (REC) and institution for

118 However, cardiac radiation exposure causes coronary microvascular endothe

119 Recent studies suggested that radiation exposure causes local and systemic inflammator

120 ss increases the risk of operator or patient radiation exposure compared to transfemoral access when

121 ntly higher in breast cancer with antecedent radiation exposure compared with breast cancer without a

122 the RADPAD radiation shield reduced operator radiation exposure compared with procedures with NOPAD o

123 The two techniques were compared in terms of radiation exposure, complications, and diagnostic accura

124 Real-time radiation exposure data were collected during consecutiv

125 yndrome (H-ARS) and delayed effects of acute radiation exposure (DEARE) are detrimental health effect

126 sunshine hours and antenatal ultraviolet A/B radiation exposure derived from weather stations and sat

127 l whole-body examinations and to investigate radiation exposure differences between both modalities.

128 c whole-body examinations and to investigate radiation exposure differences between the 2 modalities.

129 ork developing gene expression biomarkers of radiation exposure, dose, and injury, we have found many

130 Radiation exposure due to computed tomography (CT) has b

131 Radiation exposure due to GKRS and CT/angio study may be

132 ation, a steady temporal decrease in patient radiation exposure during CA and PCI was noted between 2

133 k of HFpEF increases with increasing cardiac radiation exposure during contemporary conformal breast

134 Radiation exposure during fluoroscopically guided interv

135 Radiation exposure during muscle development induces lon

136 -table adjunctive shields to reduce operator radiation exposure during percutaneous coronary procedur

137 s to the issues surrounding maternity leave, radiation exposure during pregnancy, and breastfeeding a

138 evidence that no such common causal link to radiation exposure during space travel exists.

139 ood loss, shorter operation time and reduced radiation exposure during the operation.

140 related marrow failure or leukemia, but both radiation exposure during transplant and graft-versus-ho

141 The average radiation exposure (effective dose) was approximately 0.

142 Radiation exposure estimates to patient and staff were c

143 ppel-Lindau syndrome can lead to substantial radiation exposures, even with dual-energy virtual nonco

144 translational potential in the context of a radiation exposure event.

145 of causation of male breast cancer following radiation exposure exceeds by at least a factor of 5 tha

146 Thresholds of cisplatin and radiation exposure exist, above which risk substantially

147 y were 3-fold: first, establish the level of radiation exposure experienced by the pediatric trauma p

148 roscopy and safety end points included total radiation exposure (fluoroscopy time and dose area produ

149 ase, it remains a primary source of low-dose radiation exposure for cardiac patients.

150 National mean CT radiation exposure for evaluation of renal colic during

151 Radiation exposure for interventionalists was measured w

152 e CT fluoroscopy has the potential to reduce radiation exposure for intraprocedural scans to patients

153 Radiation exposure for most patients is not significantl

154 Radiation exposure for on-site workers calculated using

155 Reducing chronic UV radiation exposure for outdoor workers through sun-safet

156 Purpose To compare the radiation exposure for participants and interventionalis

157 Radiation exposure for the interventionalist was higher

158 Organ radiation exposure for the irreversible fatty acid amide

159 Radiation exposure from all diagnostic examinations and

160 Rising concerns of radiation exposure from computed tomography have caused

161 eshold model and corollary efforts to reduce radiation exposure from CT and nuclear medicine imaging

162 Purpose To assess the potential ionizing radiation exposure from CT scans for both screening and

163 The increasing potential for accidental radiation exposure from either nuclear accidents or terr

164 the risk of cataractogenesis associated with radiation exposure from GKRS.

165 There is increasing concern about radiation exposure from myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS)

166 Risks of radiation exposure from nuclear incidents and cancer rad

167 However, the radiation exposures from an IND may be complex due to mi

168 Radiation exposure greater than 1500 cGy with any anthra

169 However, recent concerns about ionizing radiation exposure have led to a search for alternative

170 ematopoietic reconstitution following lethal radiation exposure have remained elusive.

171 esonance imaging (MRI), which do not involve radiation exposure, have also been used.

172 many potential advantages over PET/CT (lower radiation exposure, higher soft-tissue contrast, and mul

173 Due to the inherent mutagenic properties of radiation exposure, however, this can be addressed throu

174 ry-disease mortality associated with <0.5 Gy radiation exposure in a pooled cohort of 63,707 patients

175 ted with a small but significant increase in radiation exposure in both diagnostic and interventional

176 nce of increased toxicity or CBC events from radiation exposure in BRCA1/2 carriers.

177 Conclusion Radiation exposure in fluoroscopy-guided lumbar spinal i

178 al long-term neuromuscular adverse effect of radiation exposure in Hodgkin's disease and other types

179 dults account for 0.002-5.13% of the natural radiation exposure in Italy.

180 e ED and time in the wards if admitted), and radiation exposure in patients presenting to the ED with

181 ecommending unnecessary follow-up imaging or radiation exposure in pregnancy without knowing the pati

182 at skeletal surveys may be modified to limit radiation exposure in the case of suspected nonaccidenta

183 these DIs may decrease unnecessary costs and radiation exposure in the disproportionately young traum

184 functioning and the implications of limiting radiation exposure in the four biologically distinct sub

185 urpose To determine the change in per capita radiation exposure in the United States from 2006 to 201

186 c factors, with an increased expression upon radiation exposure, including BCL6, RRM2B, IDO1, FTH1, A

187 sisted in the mouse lens samples after gamma-radiation exposure increased with decreasing dose-rate a

188 inappropriate use of MPI and imaging-related radiation exposure increased.

189 ical investigation suggested that protracted radiation exposure increases radiation-induced cataract

190 Radiation exposure increases the risk of cancer througho

191 and increased chromosomal aberrations after radiation exposure indicating a defect in DNA repair.

192 Radiation exposure induces cell and tissue damage, causi

193 damage and fibrosis, we investigated whether radiation exposure induces EndoMT in primary human intes

194 Ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure induces immunosuppression, which cont

195 es of somatic mutation characterize ionizing radiation exposure irrespective of tumour type.

196 tment failure, they are often imprecise, and radiation exposure is a potential health risk.

197 ion, our data supports the notion that space radiation exposure is a risk to endocrine alterations wi

198 female breast cancer following occupational radiation exposure is among that set of cancers eligible

199 The brain's response to radiation exposure is an important concern for patients

200 To investigate whether parental radiation exposure is associated with germline mutations

201 Detailed knowledge about radiation exposure is crucial for radiology professional

202 ability of E. dermatitidis to survive gamma-radiation exposure is determined by the prior and the cu

203 adiation, that is, scoliosis, where level of radiation exposure is known.

204 risk of benign thyroid tumors following such radiation exposure is much less well known.

205 UV radiation exposure is the primary risk factor for basal

206 issue injury in the lungs following high-LET radiation exposure is unknown.

207 Although MRE avoids ionizing radiation exposure, it remains costly.

208 Results demonstrate that radiation exposure leads to tissue specific metabolic re

209 Of importance, the radiation exposure level of dual-energy CT is equivalent

210 For each radiation exposure level, readers' perception of image q

211 iation output of each tube, data sets at six radiation exposure levels (100%, 75%, 50%, 37.5%, 25%, a

212 s in the respective locations, while keeping radiation exposure levels below safety thresholds.

213 ean size-specific dose estimates for the six radiation exposure levels were 13.0, 9.8, 5.8, 4.4, 3.2,

214 puted tomographic (CT) data sets at multiple radiation exposure levels within the same patient and to

215 esize multidetector CT data sets at multiple radiation exposure levels within the same patient.

216 s-host disease, prolonged immunosuppression, radiation exposure, light skin color, sex, and T-cell de

217 Although overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure may cause harm, their effects on indi

218 Cycles of radiation exposure may increase the range of gene functi

219 in a significant reduction in operator head radiation exposure (mean left temporal difference [exter

220 These findings, plus an absence of ionizing radiation exposure, mean that CMR should be more widely

221 With current radiation exposures (median, 3.4 mSv), breast shielding

222 CARTOUNIVU module resulted in low levels of radiation exposure: median total fluoroscopy time and ef

223 asured in both groups using a second, silent radiation exposure monitoring device.

224 Since differences in radiation exposure narrow over time, the clinical signif

225 patients (mean injected dose, 231 MBq), the radiation exposure of a (68)Ga-PSMA-617 PET/CT was ident

226 , interpretability, diagnostic accuracy, and radiation exposure of a computed tomography (CT) scanner

227 Most of the respondents were unsure about radiation exposure of CBCT when compared to other types

228 ounger patients may benefit from the reduced radiation exposure of PET/MRI.

229 As such, limiting the radiation exposure of special patients, such as pregnant

230 Radiation exposure of the wrist for the interventionalis

231 One factor that may influence incident solar radiation exposure on litter is surface albedo.

232 We discovered that the effects of high-LET radiation exposure on progenitor cells occur in a p53-de

233 Little is known of the effects of ionizing radiation exposure on soil biota.

234 have harms resulting from low-dose ionizing radiation exposure or identification of extracolonic fin

235 95% CI, 1.00-1.10; P = .047), and history of radiation exposure (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.02-5.03; P = .04

236 tein-based nanopores can withstand increased radiation exposure outside Earth's shielding magnetic fi

237 Radiation exposure parameters and major and minor proced

238 Treatment with RTX before radiation exposure partially protected podocytes from SM

239 ocytes proportional to TP53 status (ionizing radiation exposure: patients with LFS, 2.71% [95% CI, 1.

240 The median cumulative radiation exposure per patient was lower in the CTA grou

241 However, the increased radiation exposure potentially associated with transradi

242 ma-H2AX) as a bioindicator of the effects of radiation exposure, predominantly nonmalignant cells in

243 Radiation exposure produced large overall changes in com

244 of clinical or microbiological markers, low-radiation exposure pulmonary CT imaging was used to moni

245 rs: age (r = 0.38; P < .001) and lifetime UV radiation exposure (r = 0.26; P < .001).

246 Their condensation, triggered by radiation exposure, recently produced unprecedented patt

247 eral hepatic tumors while achieving a slight radiation exposure reduction.

248 n recent years, with the benefits of reduced radiation exposure, reduction of imaging time, and poten

249 greater than 25-fold reduction in total body radiation exposure relative to (89)Zr-desferrioxamine-5B

250 scan should be balanced with the additional radiation exposure required.

251 To measure professional radiation exposure, ring dose meters were worn by the su

252 The knowledge of ionizing radiation exposure risks among the medical staff is esse

253 5% CI, 1.3 to 2.6; P < .001) and therapeutic radiation exposure (RR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.3; P < .00

254 econstruction of clinically-relevant complex radiation exposure scenarios.

255 Imaging using (18)F-TFB imparts a radiation exposure similar in magnitude to many other (1

256 ography was associated with lower cumulative radiation exposure than initial CT, without significant

257 Patients with IVT had lower radiation exposure than patients with nonischemic VT (to

258 Because it has a lower radiation exposure than PET/CT, combined PET/MR is expec

259 AD was associated with a 43% higher relative radiation exposure than procedures with NOPAD (P=0.009).

260 g injury (RILI) is a delayed effect of acute radiation exposure that can limit curative cancer treatm

261 ed with a clinically significant increase in radiation exposure that outweighs its benefits is unclea

262 We hypothesized that with increasing radiation exposure there would be a decrease in both tax

263 ether these islands are safe for habitation, radiation exposure through additional pathways such as f

264 ng, continued care should be taken to reduce radiation exposure to both the patients and operators.

265 rticular concern is the potential for cosmic radiation exposure to compromise critical decision makin

266 nerate quality images as well as the risk of radiation exposure to healthy tissues during repeated PE

267 d in a simulated environment to estimate the radiation exposure to locations that a Radiologist, Nurs

268 ts and patient management while reducing the radiation exposure to medical staff.

269 Radiation exposure to normal organs was low, making comb

270 s anatomically difficult to avoid off-target radiation exposure to other organs.

271 r patient selection could avoid unneccessary radiation exposure to poor responders.

272 sks of radiation exposure and the changes in radiation exposure to radiologists over time.

273 formed during (18)F-FPEB studies to minimize radiation exposure to research subjects.

274 Ionizing radiation exposure to the brain is common for patients w

275 e, manifests years or even decades following radiation exposure to the chest.

276 on-perfusion scanning, both of which involve radiation exposure to the mother and fetus.

277 ce on fluoroscopic guidance and commensurate radiation exposure to the patient and staff.

278 is associated with a significant decrease in radiation exposure to the patient with no increase in fl

279 A secondary objective is to evaluate the radiation exposure to the staff and patients when utilis

280 means of reducing kidney and salivary gland radiation exposure using a PSMA-targeting radiotracer.

281 of, and associations with, SAE and high-dose radiation exposure using large-scale registry data.

282 A higher radiation exposure using thyroid hormone withdrawal for

283 2, low contrast) were performed for multiple radiation exposures, vendors, and vendor iterative recon

284 stem cells that are rapidly eliminated after radiation exposure via apoptosis.

285 Radiation exposure was based on models.

286 Radiation exposure was compared by means of a phantom st

287 Clonal expansion following high-LET radiation exposure was correlated with elevated progenit

288 Long-term, all-cause radiation exposure was lower for the CCTA group (24 vers

289 Operator radiation exposure was measured in both groups using a s

290 Radiation exposure was measured in dose area product per

291 The radiation exposure was relatively low.

292 No differences in radiation exposure were found between the two groups.

293 Organ and whole-body radiation exposures were calculated using OLINDA softwar

294 and other radiologic outcome parameters (eg, radiation exposure) were analyzed.

295 associated with greater operator and patient radiation exposure when performed by expert operators in

296 traction angiography decreased participants' radiation exposure while preserving diagnostic image qua

297 s with the ability to rapidly determine past radiation exposure with sufficient accuracy for early po

298 ns have been suggested of high-dose ionising radiation exposure with type-2 diabetes and elevated lev

299 ominant causative agent is ultraviolet solar radiation exposure, with the majority of cases occurring

300 Conversely, LE loss attributable to radiation exposure would need to decrease by 74-fold for