Exact(6)
In the initial procedure, the patients underwent hysteroscopic polypectomy, followed by endometrial resection.
In the initial procedure, we enumerate all possible diplotypes that are consistent with total copy numbers or unphased genotypes across multiple sites for every individual.
In the initial procedure, all patients underwent only CPVI consisting of two CCLs around the ipsilateral PVs guided by 3D electroanatomical mapping and two Lasso catheters within the PVs.
While the procedure dramatically minimizes the amount of tissue removed, an unfortunate concomitant reality is that a significant percentage (around 25$\%$) of patients will be advised to return for a second surgery due to the discovery of malignant cells at the tissue margin edge, suggesting that it is likely not all of the malignant cells were removed in the initial procedure.
A repeated intervention is assumed to indicate a failure in the initial procedure.
In patients with an incomplete colonoscopy attributed to a tortuous colon, successful colonoscopy was completed in the majority of patients using a standard smaller caliber endoscope (pediatric colonoscope or gastroscope) not used in the initial procedure.
Similar(54)
Of the 29 patients in whom the initial procedure failed, 26 underwent a repeat TAFR.
Patients undergoing pleurodesis spend longer times in hospital for the initial procedure (median 4 vs 0 days as reported by Davies et al 7 and 6.5 vs 1.0 days by Putnam et al 8).
The use of a small, low-field iMRI system provided adequate imaging for resection of lesions without the need of repeat resections in the weeks following the initial procedure, and did not significantly alter the anesthetic procedure.
A substantial proportion of patients experience readmissions in the years following the initial procedure.
However, variations in the number of successful outcomes when vitrectomy is used as the initial procedure in eyes with a large posterior staphyloma and an extensive area of atrophy have led to the introduction of other surgical procedures to improve the success rate.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com