Search

Your search keyword '"Ganesh, V."' showing total 4,564 results
Start Over Author "Ganesh, V."

Refine your results

more »

more »

more »

more »

more »
4,564 results on '"Ganesh, V."'

15. Battery Management System: A Vital Need for Safer Electric Vehicles

Author

Lohar, Ganesh V., Kumar, M. Suresh, Angrisani, Leopoldo, Series Editor, Arteaga, Marco, Series Editor, Chakraborty, Samarjit, Series Editor, Chen, Jiming, Series Editor, Chen, Shanben, Series Editor, Chen, Tan Kay, Series Editor, Dillmann, Rüdiger, Series Editor, Duan, Haibin, Series Editor, Ferrari, Gianluigi, Series Editor, Ferre, Manuel, Series Editor, Jabbari, Faryar, Series Editor, Jia, Limin, Series Editor, Kacprzyk, Janusz, Series Editor, Khamis, Alaa, Series Editor, Kroeger, Torsten, Series Editor, Li, Yong, Series Editor, Liang, Qilian, Series Editor, Martín, Ferran, Series Editor, Ming, Tan Cher, Series Editor, Minker, Wolfgang, Series Editor, Misra, Pradeep, Series Editor, Mukhopadhyay, Subhas, Series Editor, Ning, Cun-Zheng, Series Editor, Nishida, Toyoaki, Series Editor, Oneto, Luca, Series Editor, Panigrahi, Bijaya Ketan, Series Editor, Pascucci, Federica, Series Editor, Qin, Yong, Series Editor, Seng, Gan Woon, Series Editor, Speidel, Joachim, Series Editor, Veiga, Germano, Series Editor, Wu, Haitao, Series Editor, Zamboni, Walter, Series Editor, Tan, Kay Chen, Series Editor, Dhote, Nitin K., editor, Kolhe, Mohan Lal, editor, and Rehman, Minhaj, editor

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

16. Challenges and Opportunities for Sustainable Construction Demolition Waste Management in India: A Review on Policies, Practices, and Prospect

Author

Tapkire, Ganesh V., Ranjankumar, Shashi, di Prisco, Marco, Series Editor, Chen, Sheng-Hong, Series Editor, Vayas, Ioannis, Series Editor, Kumar Shukla, Sanjay, Series Editor, Sharma, Anuj, Series Editor, Kumar, Nagesh, Series Editor, Wang, Chien Ming, Series Editor, Cui, Zhen-Dong, Series Editor, Vinod Chandra Menon, N., editor, Kolathayar, Sreevalsa, editor, and Sreekeshava, K. S., editor

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

21. Author Correction: Targeting LIPA independent of its lipase activity is a therapeutic strategy in solid tumors via induction of endoplasmic reticulum stress

Author

Liu, Xihui, Viswanadhapalli, Suryavathi, Kumar, Shourya, Lee, Tae-Kyung, Moore, Andrew, Ma, Shihong, Chen, Liping, Hsieh, Michael, Li, Mengxing, Sareddy, Gangadhara R., Parra, Karla, Blatt, Eliot B., Reese, Tanner C., Zhao, Yuting, Chang, Annabel, Yan, Hui, Xu, Zhenming, Pratap, Uday P., Liu, Zexuan, Roggero, Carlos M., Tan, Zhenqiu, Weintraub, Susan T., Peng, Yan, Tekmal, Rajeshwar R., Arteaga, Carlos L., Lippincott-Schwartz, Jennifer, Vadlamudi, Ratna K., Ahn, Jung-Mo, and Raj, Ganesh V.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

29. Targeted and untargeted lipidomics with integration of liver dynamics and microbiome after dietary reversal of obesogenic diet targeting inflammation-resolution signaling in aging mice

Author

Upadhyay, Gunjan, Gowda, Siddabasave Gowda B., Mishra, Sidharth P., Nath, Lipsa Rani, James, Adewale, Kulkarni, Alisha, Srikant, Yuktee, Upendram, Rohitram, Marimuthu, MathanKumar, Hui, Shu-Ping, Jain, Shalini, Vasundhara, Kain, Yadav, Hariom, and Halade, Ganesh V.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

30. Descriptive Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Tunnel Bone Grafting

Author

Group, MARS, DeFroda, Steven F, Owens, Brett D, Wright, Rick W, Huston, Laura J, Pennings, Jacquelyn S, Haas, Amanda K, Allen, Christina R, Cooper, Daniel E, DeBerardino, Thomas M, Dunn, Warren R, Lantz, Brett Brick A, Spindler, Kurt P, Stuart, Michael J, Albright, John P, Amendola, Annunziato, Annunziata, Christopher C, Arciero, Robert A, Bach, Bernard R, Baker, Champ L, Bartolozzi, Arthur R, Baumgarten, Keith M, Bechler, Jeffery R, Berg, Jeffrey H, Bernas, Geoffrey A, Brockmeier, Stephen F, Brophy, Robert H, Bush-Joseph, Charles A, Butler, J Brad, Carey, James L, Carpenter, James E, Cole, Brian J, Cooper, Jonathan M, Cox, Charles L, Creighton, R Alexander, David, Tal S, Flanigan, David C, Frederick, Robert W, Ganley, Theodore J, Garofoli, Elizabeth A, Gatt, Charles J, Gecha, Steven R, Giffin, James Robert, Hame, Sharon L, Hannafin, Jo A, Harner, Christopher D, Harris, Norman Lindsay, Hechtman, Keith S, Hershman, Elliott B, Hoellrich, Rudolf G, Johnson, David C, Johnson, Timothy S, Jones, Morgan H, Kaeding, Christopher C, Kamath, Ganesh V, Klootwyk, Thomas E, Levy, Bruce A, Benjamin, C, Maiers, G Peter, Marx, Robert G, Matava, Matthew J, Mathien, Gregory M, McAllister, David R, McCarty, Eric C, McCormack, Robert G, Miller, Bruce S, Nissen, Carl W, O’Neill, Daniel F, Parker, Richard D, Purnell, Mark L, Ramappa, Arun J, Rauh, Michael A, Rettig, Arthur C, Sekiya, Jon K, Shea, Kevin G, Sherman, Orrin H, Slauterbeck, James R, Smith, Matthew V, Spang, Jeffrey T, Svoboda, Steven J, Taft, Timothy N, Tenuta, Joachim J, Tingstad, Edwin M, Vidal, Armando F, Viskontas, Darius G, White, Richard A, Williams, James S, Wolcott, Michelle L, Wolf, Brian R, and York, James J

Subjects
Transplantation, Clinical Research, Musculoskeletal, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, Cohort Studies, Humans, Osteoarthritis, Quality of Life, Reoperation, bone graft, outcomes, revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, tunnel lysis, MARS Group, Biomedical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Human Movement and Sports Sciences, Orthopedics
Abstract

BackgroundLytic or malpositioned tunnels may require bone grafting during revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR) surgery. Patient characteristics and effects of grafting on outcomes after rACLR are not well described.PurposeTo describe preoperative characteristics, intraoperative findings, and 2-year outcomes for patients with rACLR undergoing bone grafting procedures compared with patients with rACLR without grafting.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA total of 1234 patients who underwent rACLR were prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Baseline revision and 2-year characteristics, surgical technique, pathology, treatment, and patient-reported outcome instruments (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Marx Activity Rating Scale [Marx]) were collected, as well as subsequent surgery information, if applicable. The chi-square and analysis of variance tests were used to compare group characteristics.ResultsA total of 159 patients (13%) underwent tunnel grafting-64 (5%) patients underwent 1-stage and 95 (8%) underwent 2-stage grafting. Grafting was isolated to the femur in 31 (2.5%) patients, the tibia in 40 (3%) patients, and combined in 88 patients (7%). Baseline KOOS Quality of Life (QoL) and Marx activity scores were significantly lower in the 2-stage group compared with the no bone grafting group (P≤ .001). Patients who required 2-stage grafting had more previous ACLRs (P < .001) and were less likely to have received a bone-patellar tendon-bone or a soft tissue autograft at primary ACLR procedure (P≤ .021) compared with the no bone grafting group. For current rACLR, patients undergoing either 1-stage or 2-stage bone grafting were more likely to receive a bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft (P≤ .008) and less likely to receive a soft tissue autograft (P≤ .003) compared with the no bone grafting group. At 2-year follow-up of 1052 (85%) patients, we found inferior outcomes in the 2-stage bone grafting group (IKDC score = 68; KOOS QoL score = 44; KOOS Sport/Recreation score = 65; and Marx activity score = 3) compared with the no bone grafting group (IKDC score = 77; KOOS QoL score = 63; KOOS Sport/Recreation score = 75; and Marx activity score = 7) (P≤ .01). The 1-stage bone graft group did not significantly differ compared with the no bone grafting group.ConclusionTunnel bone grafting was performed in 13% of our rACLR cohort, with 8% undergoing 2-stage surgery. Patients treated with 2-stage grafting had inferior baseline and 2-year patient-reported outcomes and activity levels compared with patients not undergoing bone grafting. Patients treated with 1-stage grafting had similar baseline and 2-year patient-reported outcomes and activity levels compared with patients not undergoing bone grafting.

Published
2022

44. Laboratory Evaluation on the Use of Natural Fibre in Gap-Graded Asphalt Mixtures

Author

Chinnabhandar, Raghuram K., Ravi Shankar, A. U., Sai Ganesh, V., Cleetus, Arnet, Chourasia, Shubham, di Prisco, Marco, Series Editor, Chen, Sheng-Hong, Series Editor, Vayas, Ioannis, Series Editor, Kumar Shukla, Sanjay, Series Editor, Sharma, Anuj, Series Editor, Kumar, Nagesh, Series Editor, Wang, Chien Ming, Series Editor, Anjaneyulu, M. V. L. R., editor, Harikrishna, M., editor, Arkatkar, Shriniwas S., editor, and Veeraragavan, A., editor

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

45. Power Generation for Street Lights Using Smart Tiles, Floor and Piezoelectric Shoes for Mobile Battery Charging Along with GPS Tracker Shoes

Author

Srinivasan, P., Sivakumar, D., Ganesh, V. N., Angrisani, Leopoldo, Series Editor, Arteaga, Marco, Series Editor, Panigrahi, Bijaya Ketan, Series Editor, Chakraborty, Samarjit, Series Editor, Chen, Jiming, Series Editor, Chen, Shanben, Series Editor, Chen, Tan Kay, Series Editor, Dillmann, Rüdiger, Series Editor, Duan, Haibin, Series Editor, Ferrari, Gianluigi, Series Editor, Ferre, Manuel, Series Editor, Hirche, Sandra, Series Editor, Jabbari, Faryar, Series Editor, Jia, Limin, Series Editor, Kacprzyk, Janusz, Series Editor, Khamis, Alaa, Series Editor, Kroeger, Torsten, Series Editor, Li, Yong, Series Editor, Liang, Qilian, Series Editor, Martín, Ferran, Series Editor, Ming, Tan Cher, Series Editor, Minker, Wolfgang, Series Editor, Misra, Pradeep, Series Editor, Möller, Sebastian, Series Editor, Mukhopadhyay, Subhas, Series Editor, Ning, Cun-Zheng, Series Editor, Nishida, Toyoaki, Series Editor, Oneto, Luca, Series Editor, Pascucci, Federica, Series Editor, Qin, Yong, Series Editor, Seng, Gan Woon, Series Editor, Speidel, Joachim, Series Editor, Veiga, Germano, Series Editor, Wu, Haitao, Series Editor, Zamboni, Walter, Series Editor, Zhang, Junjie James, Series Editor, Namrata, Kumari, editor, Priyadarshi, Neeraj, editor, Bansal, Ramesh C., editor, and Kumar, Jitendra, editor

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

46. On the Parabolic Instability Region for Kuo Problem

Author

Lavanya, S., Ganesh, V., Venkata Ramana Reddy, G., Kacprzyk, Janusz, Series Editor, Gomide, Fernando, Advisory Editor, Kaynak, Okyay, Advisory Editor, Liu, Derong, Advisory Editor, Pedrycz, Witold, Advisory Editor, Polycarpou, Marios M., Advisory Editor, Rudas, Imre J., Advisory Editor, Wang, Jun, Advisory Editor, Singh, Jagdev, editor, Anastassiou, George A., editor, Baleanu, Dumitru, editor, Cattani, Carlo, editor, and Kumar, Devendra, editor

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

47. Association Between Graft Choice and 6-Year Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the MARS Cohort

Author

Group, MARS, Wright, Rick W, Huston, Laura J, Haas, Amanda K, Pennings, Jacquelyn S, Allen, Christina R, Cooper, Daniel E, DeBerardino, Thomas M, Dunn, Warren R, Lantz, Brett A, Spindler, Kurt P, Stuart, Michael J, Albright, John P, Amendola, Annunziato, Andrish, Jack T, Annunziata, Christopher C, Arciero, Robert A, Bach, Bernard R, Baker, Champ L, Bartolozzi, Arthur R, Baumgarten, Keith M, Bechler, Jeffery R, Berg, Jeffrey H, Bernas, Geoffrey A, Brockmeier, Stephen F, Brophy, Robert H, Bush-Joseph, Charles A, Butler, J Brad, Campbell, John D, Carey, James L, Carpenter, James E, Cole, Brian J, Cooper, Jonathan M, Cox, Charles L, Creighton, R Alexander, Dahm, Diane L, David, Tal S, Flanigan, David C, Frederick, Robert W, Ganley, Theodore J, Garofoli, Elizabeth A, Gatt, Charles J, Gecha, Steven R, Giffin, James Robert, Hame, Sharon L, Hannafin, Jo A, Harner, Christopher D, Harris, Norman Lindsay, Hechtman, Keith S, Hershman, Elliott B, Hoellrich, Rudolf G, Johnson, David C, Johnson, Timothy S, Jones, Morgan H, Kaeding, Christopher C, Kamath, Ganesh V, Klootwyk, Thomas E, Levy, Bruce A, Benjamin, C, Maiers, G Peter, Marx, Robert G, Matava, Matthew J, Mathien, Gregory M, McAllister, David R, McCarty, Eric C, McCormack, Robert G, Miller, Bruce S, Nissen, Carl W, O’Neill, Daniel F, Owens, Brett D, Parker, Richard D, Purnell, Mark L, Ramappa, Arun J, Rauh, Michael A, Rettig, Arthur C, Sekiya, Jon K, Shea, Kevin G, Sherman, Orrin H, Slauterbeck, James R, Smith, Matthew V, Spang, Jeffrey T, Svoboda, Steven J, Taft, Timothy N, Tenuta, Joachim J, Tingstad, Edwin M, Vidal, Armando F, Viskontas, Darius G, White, Richard A, Williams, James S, Wolcott, Michelle L, Wolf, Brian R, and York, James J

Subjects
Transplantation, Clinical Research, 6.4 Surgery, Evaluation of treatments and therapeutic interventions, Musculoskeletal, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, Autografts, Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Grafting, Cohort Studies, Humans, Male, Reoperation, Transplantation, Autologous, anterior cruciate ligament, ACL reconstruction, revision, outcomes, graft failure, MARS Group, Biomedical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Human Movement and Sports Sciences, Orthopedics
Abstract

BackgroundAlthough graft choice may be limited in the revision setting based on previously used grafts, most surgeons believe that graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome.HypothesisIn the ACL revision setting, there would be no difference between autograft and allograft in rerupture rate and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6-year follow-up.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients who had revision surgery were identified and prospectively enrolled in this cohort study by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data collected included baseline characteristics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO measures. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of PRO instruments. Incidence of additional surgery and reoperation because of graft failure were also recorded. Multivariable regression models were used to determine the predictors (risk factors) of PROs, graft rerupture, and reoperation at 6 years after revision surgery.ResultsA total of 1234 patients including 716 (58%) men were enrolled. A total of 325 (26%) underwent revision using a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft; 251 (20%), soft tissue autograft; 289 (23%), BTB allograft; 302 (25%), soft tissue allograft; and 67 (5%), other graft. Questionnaires and telephone follow-up for subsequent surgery information were obtained for 809 (66%) patients, while telephone follow-up was only obtained for an additional 128 patients for the total follow-up on 949 (77%) patients. Graft choice was a significant predictor of 6-year Marx Activity Rating Scale scores (P = .024). Specifically, patients who received a BTB autograft for revision reconstruction had higher activity levels than did patients who received a BTB allograft (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25-2.94). Graft rerupture was reported in 5.8% (55/949) of patients by their 6-year follow-up: 3.5% (16/455) of patients with autografts and 8.4% (37/441) of patients with allografts. Use of a BTB autograft for revision resulted in patients being 4.2 times less likely to sustain a subsequent graft rupture than if a BTB allograft were utilized (P = .011; 95% CI, 1.56-11.27). No significant differences were found in graft rerupture rates between BTB autograft and soft tissue autografts (P = .87) or between BTB autografts and soft tissue allografts (P = .36). Use of an autograft was found to be a significant predictor of having fewer reoperations within 6 years compared with using an allograft (P = .010; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87).ConclusionBTB and soft tissue autografts had a decreased risk in graft rerupture compared with BTB allografts. BTB autografts were associated with higher activity level than were BTB allografts at 6 years after revision reconstruction. Surgeons and patients should consider this information when choosing a graft for revision ACL reconstruction.

Published
2021

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results