ライフサイエンスコーパス: volume-controlled

1 First, we used volume-controlled (40 muL) paired DBS-whole blood sample

2 oved short-term survival after pressure- and volume-controlled bleeding.

3 ring 20-minute frequency (0.25 Hz) and tidal volume-controlled breathing after intravenous injections

4 rough 20-min periods of frequency- and tidal volume-controlled breathing.

5 donor animal prior to isolation, and chamber volume controlled by a servo-pump.

6 ation of 10 and 40 ppm to a test lung during volume-controlled (constant flow) and pressure-controlle

7 iated gas exchange with perflubron (n=10) or volume controlled continuous positive pressure breathing

8 The rats were subjected to volume-controlled hemorrhage (2.5 mL/100 g) followed by

9 al route improves survival time after severe volume-controlled hemorrhagic shock in rats without wors

10 A three-phase, volume-controlled hemorrhagic shock model was used: hemo

11 rhagic shock models and partially realistic, volume-controlled hemorrhagic shock models to more reali

12 Patients received volume-controlled mechanical ventilation according to th

13 xpiratory pressure of 1 and 10 cm H2O, under volume-controlled mechanical ventilation in the settings

14 After injury, all animals were placed on volume-controlled mechanical ventilation to achieve PaO2

15 Tracheostomy, volume-controlled mechanical ventilation, and 72 hrs of

16 etric microfluidic DBS card were compared to volume-controlled pipetted DBS samples from the same fin

17 Following randomization, the volume controlled positive pressure breathing group deve

18 Only two (25%) of the eight animals in the volume controlled positive pressure breathing group were

19 ereas it remained unchanged over time in the volume controlled positive pressure breathing group.

20 Animals that received volume controlled positive pressure breathing remained h

21 IEPOX uptake by pure sulfate particles is a volume-controlled process, which results in particles wi

22 During volume controlled synchronized intermittent mandatory ve

23 ntrolled ventilation (intervention group) or volume-controlled ventilation (control group) with ident

24 ressure-controlled ventilation compared with volume-controlled ventilation (nitric oxide concentratio

25 ciency of ventilation would be greatest with volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) compared with pressu

26 GI can be used either with pressure (PCV) or volume-controlled ventilation and continuously or only d

27 ndrome, E-cadherin expression was similar in volume-controlled ventilation and variable ventilation;

28 olled adaptive ventilation was compared with volume-controlled ventilation at the same levels of mean

29 layed was minimally altered by helium during volume-controlled ventilation but substantially decrease

30 rin expression in lung tissue was reduced in volume-controlled ventilation compared with nonventilate

31 ion and reduced lung elastance compared with volume-controlled ventilation in both acute respiratory

32 ry acute respiratory distress syndrome, only volume-controlled ventilation increased vascular cell ad

33 rdiac arrest using an original pressure- and volume-controlled ventilation strategy in rabbits.

34 After injury, the animals were placed on volume-controlled ventilation to achieve PaO2 >60 mm Hg

35 All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 m

36 he time-controlled adaptive ventilation than volume-controlled ventilation with similar mean airway p

37 in time-controlled adaptive ventilation than volume-controlled ventilation with similar mean airway p

38 ion animals had bacteremia counts lower than volume-controlled ventilation with similar mean airway p

39 in time-controlled adaptive ventilation than volume-controlled ventilation with similar positive end-

40 ile time-controlled adaptive ventilation and volume-controlled ventilation with similar positive end-

41 ntilation)/positive end-expiratory pressure (volume-controlled ventilation) in a Pseudomonas aerugino

42 ncreased relative angiopoietin-1 expression (volume-controlled ventilation, 0.3 [0.2-0.5] vs variable

43 veolar damage (median [interquartile range]: volume-controlled ventilation, 12 [11-17] vs variable ve

44 1), and angiopoietin-2/angiopoietin-1 ratio (volume-controlled ventilation, 2.0 [1.3-2.1] vs variable

45 [8-10]; p < 0.01), interleukin-6 expression (volume-controlled ventilation, 21.5 [18.3-23.3] vs varia

46 dhesion molecule-1 messenger RNA expression (volume-controlled ventilation, 7.7 [5.7-18.6] vs nonvent

47 additional 14 animals were ventilated using volume-controlled ventilation, maintaining similar time-

48 e randomly assigned to receive conventional (volume-controlled ventilation, n = 6) or variable ventil

49 During volume-controlled ventilation, V(T) delivered was substa

50 ntrolled adaptive ventilation, compared with volume-controlled ventilation, was associated with less

51 t was higher in variable ventilation than in volume-controlled ventilation.

52 e-controlled ventilation: 14.5 to 130.5 ppm; volume-controlled ventilation: 21.6 to 104.7 ppm; nitric

53 ure-controlled ventilation: 3.2 to 30.9 ppm; volume-controlled ventilation: 4.5 to 27.1 ppm).

54 omy was performed, sheep were connected to a volume-controlled ventilator.