kwic
data
data
right
off
ON
225
1
100
500
strict
ELIZA cgi-bash version rev. 1.90
- Medical English LInking keywords finder for the PubMed Zipped Archive (ELIZA) -
return
kwic search for data out of >500 occurrences
617251 occurrences (No.12 in the rank) during 5 years in the PubMed. [cache]
--- ABSTRACT ---
--- ABSTRACT END ---
[frequency of next (right) word to data]
617251 occurrences (No.12 in the rank) during 5 years in the PubMed. [cache]
| 225) These data suggest that MRI is more sensitive than AUS for detecting sacral abdominal lymphadenopathy in dogs with AGAAS. |
| PMID:23432735 DOI:10.1111/vco.12022 |
| 2015 Veterinary and comparative oncology |
| * Comparison of abdominal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for detection of abdominal lymphadenopathy in dogs with metastatic apocrine gland adenocarcinoma of the anal sac. |
| - Imaging studies in humans with anal and rectal cancer indicate that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a more sensitive technique than abdominal ultrasound (AUS) for the detection of abdominal lymphadenopathy. The purpose of this retrospective study was to directly compare the efficacy of these two techniques in detecting abdominal lymphadenopathy in dogs with apocrine gland adenocarcinoma of the anal sac (AGAAS). Six dogs with histologically confirmed AGAAS and histopathologic confirmation of metastasis to abdominal lymph nodes (LNs) had AUS and abdominal MRI. AUS identified lymphadenopathy in two of six dogs, whereas MRI identified lymphadenopathy in all the six dogs. Lymphadenopathy was predominantly sacral in location, with involvement of the medial iliac and hypogastric LNs in only two cases. These data suggest that MRI is more sensitive than AUS for detecting sacral abdominal lymphadenopathy in dogs with AGAAS. As such, MRI could be considered in any patient with AGAAS for initial staging of this disease. |
[
right
kwic]
(1)70  from |
(14)7 revealed |
(27)3 analyses |
(40)2 at |
| (2)55 were |
(15)7 support |
(28)3 can |
(41)2 by |
| (3)32 *null* | (16)7 was |
(29)3 concerning |
(42)2 clearly |
| (4)26 on |
(17)6 analysis |
(30)3 in |
(43)2 clustering |
| (5)19 and |
(18)6 obtained |
(31)3 indicated |
(44)2 have |
| (6)18 for |
(19)5 collection |
(32)3 may |
(45)2 here |
| (7)17 suggest |
(20)5 sets |
(33)3 the |
(46)2 highlight |
| (8)13 are |
(21)5 showed |
(34)3 which |
(47)2 mining |
| (9)11 set |
(22)5 we |
(35)3 with |
(48)2 show |
| (10)11 to |
(23)4 demonstrate |
(36)3 would |
(49)2 shows |
| (11)9 of |
(24)4 is |
(37)2 about |
|
| (12)7 collected |
(25)4 provide |
(38)2 also |
|
| (13)7 indicate |
(26)4 regarding |
(39)2 as |
add keyword
--- WordNet output for data ---