173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11677476)
1. Diagnostic quality of biopsy specimens: comparison between a conventional biopsy forceps and multibite forceps.
Fantin AC; Neuweiler J; Binek JS; Suter WR; Meyenberger C
Gastrointest Endosc; 2001 Nov; 54(5):600-4. PubMed ID: 11677476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A prospective comparison of performance of biopsy forceps used in single passage with multiple bites during upper endoscopy.
Chu KM; Yuen ST; Wong WM; Wong KW; Lai KC; Hu WH; Leung SY; Yuen MF; Lam SK; Wong BC
Endoscopy; 2003 Apr; 35(4):338-42. PubMed ID: 12664392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of standard single-bite with multiple-bite biopsy forceps for collection of gastrointestinal biopsies in dogs: a prospective study.
Edery EG; Scase T; Kisielewicz C; Dhumeaux MP
Vet Rec; 2018 Nov; 183(20):624. PubMed ID: 30115670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Pelican single-use multibite biopsy forceps and traditional double-bite forceps: evaluation in a porcine model.
Zaidman JS; Frederick WG; Furth EE; Su CG; Ginsberg GG
Gastrointest Endosc; 2006 Oct; 64(4):582-8. PubMed ID: 16996354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of endoscopic biopsy forceps characteristics on tissue specimens: results of a prospective randomized study.
Woods KL; Anand BS; Cole RA; Osato MS; Genta RM; Malaty H; Gurer IE; Rossi DD
Gastrointest Endosc; 1999 Feb; 49(2):177-83. PubMed ID: 9925695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Biopsy specimens obtained with small-caliber endoscopes have comparable diagnostic performances than those obtained with conventional endoscopes: a prospective study on 1335 specimens.
Walter T; Chesnay AL; Dumortier J; Mège-LeChevallier F; Hervieu V; Guillaud O; Lapalus MG; Lépilliez V; Fumex F; Ponchon T; Scoazec JY
J Clin Gastroenterol; 2010 Jan; 44(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 19661817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of wedge to forceps videothoracoscopic lung biopsy. Gross and histologic findings.
Colt HG; Russack V; Shanks TG; Moser KM
Chest; 1995 Feb; 107(2):546-50. PubMed ID: 7842791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Endoscopic multiple biopsy and rapid diagnosis by in situ fixation and histopathologic processing.
Zimmon DS; Smith FB; Manheimer F; Fan C; Njiwaji C; Aksenov S; Chattoo P
Gastrointest Endosc; 2017 Aug; 86(2):333-342. PubMed ID: 27988287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of Performance Characteristics of Oval Cup Forceps Versus Serrated Jaw Forceps in Gastric Biopsy.
Sussman DA; Deshpande AR; Shankar U; Barkin JA; Medina AM; Poppiti RJ; Cubeddu LX; Barkin JS
Dig Dis Sci; 2016 Aug; 61(8):2338-2343. PubMed ID: 27003145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prospective, randomized, pathologist-blinded study of disposable alligator-jaw biopsy forceps for gastric mucosal biopsy.
Abudayyeh S; Hoffman J; El-Zimaity HT; Graham DY
Dig Liver Dis; 2009 May; 41(5):340-4. PubMed ID: 18799373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An observer-blinded, prospective, randomized comparison of forceps for endoscopic esophageal biopsy.
Schafer TW; Hollis-Perry KM; Mondragon RM; Brann OS
Gastrointest Endosc; 2002 Feb; 55(2):192-6. PubMed ID: 11818921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Adequacy of mucosal sampling with the "two-bite" forceps technique: a prospective, randomized, blinded study.
Padda S; Shah I; Ramirez FC
Gastrointest Endosc; 2003 Feb; 57(2):170-3. PubMed ID: 12556778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: comparison with standard forceps of sample size and adequacy of specimen.
Turk DJ; Kozarek RA; Botoman VA; Patterson DJ; Ball TJ
J Clin Gastroenterol; 1991 Feb; 13(1):76-8. PubMed ID: 2007750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of weight, depth, and diagnostic adequacy of specimens obtained with 16 different biopsy forceps designed for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Danesh BJ; Burke M; Newman J; Aylott A; Whitfield P; Cotton PB
Gut; 1985 Mar; 26(3):227-31. PubMed ID: 3972269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective, randomized comparison of disposable and reusable biopsy forceps in gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Yang R; Naritoku W; Laine L
Gastrointest Endosc; 1994; 40(6):671-4. PubMed ID: 7859962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of endoscopic forceps on quality of duodenal mucosal biopsy in healthy dogs.
Goutal-Landry CM; Mansell J; Ryan KA; Gaschen FP
J Vet Intern Med; 2013; 27(3):456-61. PubMed ID: 23600705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Randomized comparison of 3 different-sized biopsy forceps for quality of sampling in Barrett's esophagus.
Gonzalez S; Yu WM; Smith MS; Slack KN; Rotterdam H; Abrams JA; Lightdale CJ
Gastrointest Endosc; 2010 Nov; 72(5):935-40. PubMed ID: 21034895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Can the 1.8 mm transnasal biopsy forceps instead of standard 2.2 mm alter rapid urease test and histological diagnosis?
Jeon SJ; Shin SJ; Lee KM; Lim SK; Lee YC; Lee MH; Hwang JC; Cheong JY; Yoo BM; Kim JH
J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2012 Aug; 27(8):1384-7. PubMed ID: 22497665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of forceps size and mode of orientation on endoscopic small bowel biopsy evaluation.
Ladas SD; Tsamouri M; Kouvidou C; Raptis SA
Gastrointest Endosc; 1994; 40(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 8163135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluating Quality and Adequacy of Gastrointestinal Samples Collected using Reusable or Disposable Forceps.
Cartwright JA; Hill TL; Smith S; Shaw D
J Vet Intern Med; 2016 Jul; 30(4):1002-7. PubMed ID: 27255591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
