312 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11992366)
1. Brush cytology of the biliary tract: retrospective study of 278 cases with histopathologic correlation.
Govil H; Reddy V; Kluskens L; Treaba D; Massarani-Wafai R; Selvaggi S; Gattuso P
Diagn Cytopathol; 2002 May; 26(5):273-7. PubMed ID: 11992366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Biliary brush cytology for the diagnosis of malignancy: a single center experience.
Stoos-Veić T; Bilić B; Kaić G; Ostović KT; Babić Z; Kujundzić M
Coll Antropol; 2010 Mar; 34(1):139-43. PubMed ID: 20432742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prospective evaluation of brush cytology of biliary strictures during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Glasbrenner B; Ardan M; Boeck W; Preclik G; Möller P; Adler G
Endoscopy; 1999 Nov; 31(9):712-7. PubMed ID: 10604612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Endobiliary brush cytology during percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage in patients with obstructive jaundice.
Xing GS; Geng JC; Han XW; Dai JH; Wu CY
Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int; 2005 Feb; 4(1):98-103. PubMed ID: 15730930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Efficacy of endoscopic wire guided biliary brushing in the evaluation of biliary strictures.
Sachdev A; Duseja A; Bhalla A; Handa U; Sandhu BS; Gupta V; Kochhar S
Trop Gastroenterol; 2003; 24(4):215-7. PubMed ID: 15164539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Biliary tract cytology in specimens obtained by direct cholangiographic procedures: a study of 74 cases.
de Peralta-Venturina MN; Wong DK; Purslow MJ; Kini SR
Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Jun; 14(4):334-48. PubMed ID: 8725136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Brush cytology of the extrahepatic biliary tract: comparison of cytologic features of adenocarcinoma and benign biliary strictures.
Cohen MB; Wittchow RJ; Johlin FC; Bottles K; Raab SS
Mod Pathol; 1995 Jun; 8(5):498-502. PubMed ID: 7675767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Endoscopic brush cytology from the biliary duct system is still valuable.
Eiholm S; Thielsen P; Kromann-Andersen H
Dan Med J; 2013 Jul; 60(7):A4656. PubMed ID: 23809967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Pancreatic and bile duct brushing cytology in 1000 cases: review of findings and comparison of preparation methods.
Volmar KE; Vollmer RT; Routbort MJ; Creager AJ
Cancer; 2006 Aug; 108(4):231-8. PubMed ID: 16541448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures.
Adamsen S; Olsen M; Jendresen MB; Holck S; Glenthøj A
Scand J Gastroenterol; 2006 May; 41(5):597-603. PubMed ID: 16638704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Endoscopic bile duct brushing of malignant pancreatic biliary strictures: retrospective study with comparison of conventional smear and ThinPrep techniques.
Ylagan LR; Liu LH; Maluf HM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2003 Apr; 28(4):196-204. PubMed ID: 12672095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: a study of 103 cases.
Chhieng DC; Jhala D; Jhala N; Eltoum I; Chen VK; Vickers S; Heslin MJ; Wilcox CM; Eloubeidi MA
Cancer; 2002 Aug; 96(4):232-9. PubMed ID: 12209665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Intraoperative fine needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic lesions. A study of 90 cases.
Sáez A; Català I; Brossa R; Funes A; Jaurrieta E; Ferrer JE
Acta Cytol; 1995; 39(3):485-8. PubMed ID: 7762337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Diagnostic accuracy of simpson atherectomy catheter biopsy in detecting pancreaticobiliary malignancy.
Kaufman D; Widlus D; Lazinger M; Didolkar M; Kumar D; Dutta SK
Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Apr; 96(4):1054-8. PubMed ID: 11316146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cytologic criteria for well differentiated adenocarcinoma of the pancreas in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens.
Lin F; Staerkel G
Cancer; 2003 Feb; 99(1):44-50. PubMed ID: 12589645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effectiveness of a new long cytology brush in the evaluation of malignant biliary obstruction: a prospective study.
Fogel EL; deBellis M; McHenry L; Watkins JL; Chappo J; Cramer H; Schmidt S; Lazzell-Pannell L; Sherman S; Lehman GA
Gastrointest Endosc; 2006 Jan; 63(1):71-7. PubMed ID: 16377319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Split sample comparison of ThinPrep and conventional smears in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-guided pancreatic fine-needle aspirations.
Siddiqui MT; Gokaslan ST; Saboorian MH; Ashfaq R
Diagn Cytopathol; 2005 Feb; 32(2):70-5. PubMed ID: 15637676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cytologic features and diagnostic pitfalls of primary ampullary tumors by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy.
Defrain C; Chang CY; Srikureja W; Nguyen PT; Gu M
Cancer; 2005 Oct; 105(5):289-97. PubMed ID: 15986397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Routine brush cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for assessment of pancreatobiliary strictures.
Smoczynski M; Jablonska A; Matyskiel A; Lakomy J; Dubowik M; Marek I; Biernat W; Limon J
Gastrointest Endosc; 2012 Jan; 75(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 22078103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of ThinPrep and conventional preparations in pancreatic fine-needle aspiration biopsy.
de Luna R; Eloubeidi MA; Sheffield MV; Eltoum I; Jhala N; Jhala D; Chen VK; Chhieng DC
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Feb; 30(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 14755754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
