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 *

96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10146427)

  • 1. The influence of electrode shape on the performance of electrohydraulic lithotripters.
    Loske AM; Prieto FE
    J Stone Dis; 1993 Oct; 5(4):228-39. PubMed ID: 10146427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Shock wave sensors: I. Requirements and design.
    Lewin PA; Schafer ME
    J Lithotr Stone Dis; 1991 Jan; 3(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 10149140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A performance analysis of an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter: spatial pressure distribution and the effects of lithotripter voltage, electrode life, and tissue attenuation.
    Monaghan P; Gilbert JL; Prystowsky JB
    J Stone Dis; 1992 Oct; 4(4):289-300. PubMed ID: 10147810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The acoustic fields of the Wolf electrohydraulic lithotripter.
    Campbell DS; Flynn HG; Blackstock DT; Linke C; Carstensen EL
    J Lithotr Stone Dis; 1991 Apr; 3(2):147-56. PubMed ID: 10149155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The electromechanical impactor: a new device for intracorporeal stone fragmentation.
    Dretler SP
    Arch Esp Urol; 1993 Jun; 46(5):439-43. PubMed ID: 8342987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Piezoelectric, electrohydraulic and electromagnetic shock wave lithotripsy for lower ureteral stone].
    Sun X; Chen C; Wang Y; Yu H
    Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 1999 Apr; 37(4):235-7. PubMed ID: 11829829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Focal size and shock wave pressure: a comparison of three different physical shock wave generators].
    Janowitz P; Stuber M; Meier T; Steiner R; Schneider HT; Ell C; Neuhaus H; Ott R; Swobodnik W; Kratzer W
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 1990 Dec; 115(51-52):1945-9. PubMed ID: 2261859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reduction of tissue injury in shock-wave lithotripsy by using an acoustic diode.
    Zhu S; Dreyer T; Liebler M; Riedlinger R; Preminger GM; Zhong P
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2004 May; 30(5):675-82. PubMed ID: 15183234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. In vitro gallstone fragmentation by three piezoelectric lithotripters.
    Vakil N
    J Stone Dis; 1993 Jan; 5(1):39-45. PubMed ID: 10148260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of an experimental electrohydraulic discharge device for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: Pressure field of sparker array.
    Li G; Connors BA; Schaefer RB; Gallagher JJ; Evan AP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Nov; 142(5):3147. PubMed ID: 29195423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pressure distribution and energy flow in the focal region of two different electromagnetic shock wave sources.
    Folberth W; Köhler G; Rohwedder A; Matura E
    J Stone Dis; 1992 Jan; 4(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 10149172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: our experimental and clinical experience with the Direx machine.
    Servadio C; Livne PM; Simon D
    J Lithotr Stone Dis; 1990 Jul; 2(3):205-10. PubMed ID: 10148920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dual pulse shock wave lithotripsy: in vitro and in vivo study.
    Loske AM; Fernández F; Zendejas H; Paredes M; Castaño-Tostado E
    J Urol; 2005 Dec; 174(6):2388-92. PubMed ID: 16280853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pressure-release versus rigid reflector for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.
    Loske AM; Prieto FE
    J Endourol; 2002 Jun; 16(5):273-80. PubMed ID: 12184076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bifocal reflector for electrohydraulic lithotripters.
    Prieto FE; Loske AM
    J Endourol; 1999 Mar; 13(2):65-75. PubMed ID: 10213098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A survey of the acoustic output of commercial extracorporeal shock wave lithotripters.
    Coleman AJ; Saunders JE
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 1989; 15(3):213-27. PubMed ID: 2741250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The role of cavitational activity in fragmentation processes by lithotripters.
    Sass W; Dreyer HP; Kettermann S; Seifert J
    J Stone Dis; 1992 Jul; 4(3):193-207. PubMed ID: 10147666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Principles of biliary extracorporeal lithotripsy. Technical considerations and clinical implications.
    Chapman WC; Stephens WH; Williams LF
    Am J Surg; 1989 Sep; 158(3):179-83. PubMed ID: 2672838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of stone damage caused by different modes of shock wave generation.
    Chuong CJ; Zhong P; Preminger GM
    J Urol; 1992 Jul; 148(1):200-5. PubMed ID: 1613869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in symptomatic cholesterol gallbladder stone patients with a second generation electrohydraulic lithotripter (MPL-9000): experiences with 106 patients over 15 months.
    Swobodnik W; Janowitz P; Ott R; Kratzer W; Kuhn K; Schumacher KA; Ullrich W; Ott H; Wechsler JG; Ditschuneit H
    J Stone Dis; 1992 Jul; 4(3):208-15. PubMed ID: 10147667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.