戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 ring effective regurgitant orifice [ERO] and regurgitant volume).
2 based effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume.
3 RO was not linked to outcome, in contrast to regurgitant volume.
4  regurgitant gradient, a notable increase in regurgitant volume.
5 ted by pulsed-Doppler technique to determine regurgitant volume.
6 for evaluating effective AR orifice area and regurgitant volume.
7 or determining effective AR orifice size and regurgitant volume.
8 remodeling parameters across the spectrum of regurgitant volume.
9 red with those with no PPM (change in mitral regurgitant volume: -11+/-4 versus -17+/-5 mL, respectiv
10 /LA area 43 +/- 4% to 8 +/- 5%, p < 0.0001), regurgitant volume (14.7 +/- 2.1 ml to 3.1 +/- 0.5 ml, p
11  versus 426+/-50 ms; P<0.0001) yielded lower regurgitant volume (24.8+/-13.4 versus 48.6+/-25.6 mL; P
12 itutions and presenting moderate SMR (mitral regurgitant volume 30 to 45 mL/beat) not considered for
13                    Regurgitant fraction 30%, regurgitant volume 35 mL and right ventricle free wall l
14  mm(2)) in 25%, with mean ERO 24+/-24 mm(2), regurgitant volume 37+/-35 mL.
15 +/-0.5 cm versus 0.6+/-0.3 cm; P=0.001), and regurgitant volume (57.2+/-12.8 mL/beat versus 30.8+/-6.
16 ice were 43+/-37 mm and r=.79 (P<.0001); for regurgitant volume, 62+/-45 mL and r=.80 (P<.0001); and
17 tified according to current recommendations (regurgitant volume, 66+/-40 ml per beat; effective regur
18 had a mean ejection fraction 64 +/- 9%, mean regurgitant volume 67 +/- 31 ml, and low mean Charlson c
19 s, 60% men) in sinus rhythm with organic MR (regurgitant volume 68 +/- 42 ml/beat) and performed at b
20 ues for VCW (0.5 +/- 0.2 to 0.5 +/- 0.2 cm), regurgitant volume (69 +/- 47 to 69 +/- 56 ml) or effect
21  versus -37+/-21%), and percent mitral valve regurgitant volume (-99+/-2% versus -52+/-56%) for the X
22 al TEE demonstrates significant reduction of regurgitant volume after PMVR.
23 ht ventricular stroke volume minus pulmonary regurgitant volume) after BMS remained unchanged (33.8+/
24 fied an inflection point at which calculated regurgitant volume agreed best with invasive measurement
25                                       Mitral regurgitant volume and orifice area did not correlate wi
26 f the present study was to quantitate aortic regurgitant volume and regurgitant fraction in a chronic
27                                       Aortic regurgitant volume and regurgitant fraction were associa
28 raphic dimensions were determined as well as regurgitant volume and regurgitant orifice area derived
29  echocardiography are associated with higher regurgitant volumes and fractions, they are frequently n
30                                              Regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions by the new
31 olor Doppler method provides accurate aortic regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions without cu
32 a promising method for determining pulmonary regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions.
33 locity-time integral was also used to obtain regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions.
34                                    Pulmonary regurgitant volumes and RV forward stroke volumes comput
35 (planimetered left ventricular stroke volume-regurgitant volume) and derived a cardiac magnetic reson
36 es in effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume, and was not different between dynami
37 ce = 0.51 +/- 1.89 ml/beat for the pulmonary regurgitant volume; and r = 0.91, mean difference = -0.2
38  conditions) and grade III-IV regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat > 30 ml, eight conditions) were
39                       Grade I regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat < 15 ml, six conditions), grade
40 ml, six conditions), grade II regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat between 16 ml and 30 ml, five co
41  valve closure, increased the early systolic regurgitant volume before complete coaptation, and decre
42                                 Mitral valve regurgitant volume by color Doppler 3D TEE was determine
43 because the heart compensates for increasing regurgitant volume by left-atrial enlargement, causes le
44  orifice area was calculated by dividing the regurgitant volume by the continuous-wave Doppler veloci
45 e regurgitant orifice area (EROA) and aortic regurgitant volume by using the color Doppler-imaged ven
46                                       Mitral regurgitant volume calculated from R(calc) and R(meas) c
47             However, shorter MR yields lower regurgitant volume, consequences, and benign outcomes.
48                                   The mitral regurgitant volume decreased from 47+/-27 ml before ther
49 imal study, using strictly quantified aortic regurgitant volumes, demonstrated that the digital color
50 ric method consistently decreased after CRT: regurgitant volume from 40 +/- 20 ml to 24 +/- 17 ml and
51 h > or = 0.5 cm was always associated with a regurgitant volume &gt; 60 mL and a regurgitant orifice are
52  without surgery compared with only 21% with regurgitant volume &gt;55 mL (P<0.0001).
53 ) to be independently associated with mitral regurgitant volume improvement.
54                                    The added regurgitant volume in MR increases the left atrial to le
55  used to estimate regurgitant flow rates and regurgitant volumes in the presence of mitral regurgitat
56 ring effective regurgitant orifice [ERO] and regurgitant volume) in routine practice of 5 tertiary ca
57     As a result of reduced TR driving force, regurgitant volume increased less than effective regurgi
58 na contracta width < or = 0.3 cm predicted a regurgitant volume &lt; 60 mL and a regurgitant orifice are
59 ndications for surgery: 91% of subjects with regurgitant volume &lt;/=55 mL survived to 5 years without
60 +/- 2.9 ml vs. 11 +/- 5.8 ml, p < 0.0001 for regurgitant volume; mean difference 1.2 +/- 7.6% vs. 19
61                      In the patients, mitral regurgitant volume (MRV) by ACMm-ACMa agreed with PD-2D
62 color Doppler methods for determining mitral regurgitant volume (MRV) have prevented their widespread
63                      Optimal thresholds were regurgitant volume of 47 mL and regurgitant fraction of
64 sociated with postoperative change in mitral regurgitant volume on univariable analysis were entered
65 tive MR grade, correlated significantly with regurgitant volume or regurgitant orifice area in a mult
66  higher extracellular volume with increasing regurgitant volume (P value for trend <0.001), whereas t
67 mass compared with MR across the spectrum of regurgitant volume (P<0.001).
68  orifice velocity showed good agreement with regurgitant volumes per beat (r = .81, difference = 0.9
69 and agreements between peak and mean RFR and regurgitant volumes per beat as determined by Doppler ec
70 Rs varied from 0.7 to 4.9 (2.7+/-1.3) L/min, regurgitant volumes per beat varied from 7.0 to 48.0 (26
71                       Peak and mean RFRs and regurgitant volumes per beat were calculated from vena c
72 concordance when only considering PISA-based regurgitant volume, PISA-based effective regurgitant ori
73 imal isovelocity surface area (PISA)-derived regurgitant volume, PISA-derived effective regurgitant o
74 ted in context, and in mid-late systolic MR, regurgitant volume provides information more reflective
75 width from apical views correlated well with regurgitant volume (r = .85, SEE = 19 mL) and regurgitan
76 asternal long-axis view correlated well with regurgitant volume (r = .85, SEE = 20 mL) and regurgitan
77  hepatic venous flow (r = 0.79, p < 0.0001), regurgitant volume (r = 0.77, p<0.0001) and right atrial
78                                              Regurgitant volumes ranged from 2 to 191 mL.
79 effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area and regurgitant volume recorded by quantitative Doppler (r=0
80 on (grade 4) were 60 mL, 50%, and 40 mm2 for regurgitant volume, regurgitant fraction, and orifice, r
81 y effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA), regurgitant volume (RegVol), and regurgitant fraction (R
82 asurements of regurgitant fraction (RgF) and regurgitant volume (RgV).
83                                          CMR regurgitant volume (RV) and regurgitant fraction (RF) we
84       All patients underwent MRI to quantify regurgitant volume (RV) of OMR by subtracting the aortic
85                                          The regurgitant volume (Rvol) across the MV was obtained usi
86                             In IMR patients, regurgitant volume (RVol) and effective regurgitant orif
87 ffective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) and regurgitant volume (RVol) from 2004 to 2017 who had >=1
88      We hypothesized that CMR measurement of regurgitant volume (RVol) is more reproducible than TTE.
89  area (EROA) of 0.4 to 0.2 cm(2), and from a regurgitant volume (RVol) of 60 to 30 ml.
90 , the effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume (RVol) were measured by the PISA tech
91 diographic methods allow the quantitation of regurgitant volume (RVol), regurgitant fraction (RF) and
92                                              Regurgitant volume was reduced from 84.1+/-38.3 mL prein
93                                       Mitral regurgitant volume was then calculated according to the
94  VCW, effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume were measured by quantitative Doppler