166) As a result, allograft and patient survival has increased, leaving in |
167) ociation between KIT staining pattern and patient survival time, the results suggest |
168) s gene functions and thus cancer risk and patient survival. |
169) itional interventions, complications, and patient survival. |
170) DAC3 levels were associated with improved patient survival. |
171) w marker candidates for the prediction of patient survival. |
172) so rapid recognition is critical for the patient survival. |
173) Patient underwent surgery for evacuation o |
174) BDUMP was diagnosed, and the patient underwent a thorough systemic inve |
175) For this case report, the patient underwent an anterior mandibular r |
176) The patient underwent aneurysmectomy successfu |
177) A patient underwent posterior spinal surgery |
178) menced with warfarin (Coumadin®) and the patient underwent successful debridement a |
179) The patient underwent tumorectomy. |
180) The patient developed a progressive deteriorat |
181) gery using medical therapy failed and the patient developed a progressive multi-orga |
182) The patient developed a transverse fracture in |
183) Despite the initial response, the patient developed a tumor-like skin lesion |
184) A few months later, the patient developed acute progressive neurol |
185) The patient developed an early left ventricula |
186) However, their impact on patient outcomes has not been demonstrated |
187) uld engage positively with SNS to improve patient outcomes or create more patient-le |
188) harmacy resident contributed to improving patient outcomes while reducing utilizatio |
189) large randomized control trial looked at patient outcomes with strategies of early |
190) ged in a timely manner to improve overall patient outcomes. |
191) isual analog scale was used to assess the patient-reported outcomes. |
192) It results in high patient satisfaction rates and modest impr |
193) Mean patient satisfaction was 8·3 ± 0·5 |
194) ed with negligible complications and high patient satisfaction was maintained during |
195) was to evaluate the clinical success and patient satisfaction when dental implant-r |
196) Other variables that could influence patient satisfaction with this therapy wer |
197) ptom and functional improvement with high patient satisfaction. |
198) benefits in the delivery of drug to some patient groups such as pediatrics. |
|