These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10125975)

  • 41. A cost and performance evaluation of disposable and reusable biopsy forceps in GI endoscopy.
    Yang R; Ng S; Nichol M; Laine L
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2000 Mar; 51(3):266-70. PubMed ID: 10699769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Comparison of a new reusable gynecologic laparoscopic electric morcellator with a disposable morcellator: a preliminary trial.
    Martínez-Zamora MA; Castelo-Branco C; Balasch J; Carmona F
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2009; 16(5):595-8. PubMed ID: 19596217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Reusable vs. disposable O.R. linen: which is really cheaper?
    Schmitz JW
    Hosp Purch Manage; 1983 Aug; 8(8):3-6. PubMed ID: 10261669
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Reusable versus single-use laparoscopy instruments: who is responsible for patient safety?
    Cahill NE
    Minim Invasive Surg Nurs; 1994; 8(2):68-70. PubMed ID: 7812384
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. [Costs and advantages of non-woven disposable textiles compared to traditional reusable textiles in surgical practice].
    Ducel G
    Soins Chir; 1983; (28-29):59-64. PubMed ID: 6555887
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Cost analysis of laparoscopic versus open orchiopexy in the management of unilateral nonpalpable testicles.
    Lorenzo AJ; Samuelson ML; Docimo SG; Baker LA; Lotan Y
    J Urol; 2004 Aug; 172(2):712-6. PubMed ID: 15247768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Reusable versus disposable forceps: the dilemma of cost and safety.
    Gordon SJ
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2000 Mar; 51(3):363-5. PubMed ID: 10699795
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps in GI endoscopy: a cost-minimization analysis.
    Bourguignon C; Destrumelle AS; Koch S; Grumblat A; Carayon P; Chopard C; Woronoff-Lemsi MC
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2003 Aug; 58(2):226-9. PubMed ID: 12872090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps: a prospective cost evaluation.
    Deprez PH; Horsmans Y; Van Hassel M; Hoang P; Piessevaux H; Geubel A
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2000 Mar; 51(3):262-5. PubMed ID: 10699768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Cutting costs or cutting corners? Cardiac cath reuse.
    Wilson D
    Mater Manag Health Care; 1997 May; 6(5):34, 36. PubMed ID: 10167493
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Examining liability risks in disposable reuse.
    OR Manager; 1996 Jun; 12(6):10, 16. PubMed ID: 10157851
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The cost of laparoscopic surgery is the price of progress.
    Winter DC
    Br J Surg; 2009 Apr; 96(4):327-8. PubMed ID: 19283749
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Prospective randomized single-blinded in vitro and ex vivo evaluation of new and reprocessed laparoscopic trocars.
    Mues AC; Haramis G; Casazza C; Okhunov Z; Badani KK; Landman J
    J Am Coll Surg; 2010 Dec; 211(6):738-43. PubMed ID: 21036630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. [Single-use biopsy forceps for digestive endoscopy: a wise decision or a caricature of precaution principles?].
    Sautereau D; Palazzo L
    Gastroenterol Clin Biol; 2001; 25(6-7):653-5. PubMed ID: 11673730
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The evolving design of laparoscopic instruments.
    Stenning GG
    Endosc Surg Allied Technol; 1995; 3(2-3):133-4. PubMed ID: 7552129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Reuse of disposable laparoscopic instruments: a study of related surgical complications.
    DesCôteaux JG; Poulin EC; Lortie M; Murray G; Gingras S
    Can J Surg; 1995 Dec; 38(6):497-500. PubMed ID: 7497363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Ergonomics and design of laparoscopic instruments: results of a survey among laparoscopic surgeons.
    Van Veelen MA; Meijer DW
    J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 1999 Dec; 9(6):481-9. PubMed ID: 10632508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Radially dilating trocars are not cost-effective alternatives except for pediatric laparoscopic operations, especially those for undescended testis and imperforate anus.
    Ng WT; Chang D
    Surg Endosc; 2001 Apr; 15(4):424-5. PubMed ID: 11395831
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Group contracts tempering LIS (laparoscopic instruments and supplies) prices.
    Hosp Mater Manage; 1995 May; 20(5):1, 12-3. PubMed ID: 10172310
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Reuse of disposables. Reprocessing issues taking users down 'slippery slope'.
    OR Manager; 1996 Jun; 12(6):1, 7. PubMed ID: 10157849
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.