167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12664392)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
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. 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]
6. Comparison of transbronchial lung biopsy yield between standard forceps and electrocautery hot forceps in swine.
Wahidi MM; Shofer SL; Sporn TA; Ernst A
Respiration; 2010; 79(2):137-40. PubMed ID: 19707013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps for colorectal epithelial cell proliferation in humans.
Sandler RS; Cummings MS; Keku TO; Terse A; Mehta N
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2000 Oct; 9(10):1123-5. PubMed ID: 11045798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Jumbo forceps are superior to standard large-capacity forceps in obtaining diagnostically adequate inflammatory bowel disease surveillance biopsy specimens.
Elmunzer BJ; Higgins PD; Kwon YM; Golembeski C; Greenson JK; Korsnes SJ; Elta GH
Gastrointest Endosc; 2008 Aug; 68(2):273-8; quiz 334, 336. PubMed ID: 18155204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of three types of biopsy forceps in the endoscopic surveillance of Barrett's oesophagus.
Dolwani S; Saleem H; Thompson IW; Allison MC
Endoscopy; 2002 Dec; 34(12):946-9. PubMed ID: 12471536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Do forceps biopsies truthfully reflect the nature of endoscopically uncovered polypoid lesions of the colon?
Stermer E; Bejar J; Miselevich I; Goldstein O; Keren D; Lavy A; Boss JH; Keren D
Colorectal Dis; 2005 Jul; 7(4):345-9. PubMed ID: 15932556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reusable biopsy forceps: a prospective evaluation of cleaning, function, adequacy of tissue specimen, and durability.
Kozarek RA; Attia FM; Sumida SE; Raltz SL; Roach SK; Schembre DB; Brandabur JJ; Ball TJ; Gluck M; Jiranek GC; Patterson DJ; Bredfeldt JE; Gelfand M; McCormick SE; Drajpuch DB; Moran DK
Gastrointest Endosc; 2001 Jun; 53(7):747-50. PubMed ID: 11375582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Histological quality of polyps resected using the cold versus hot biopsy technique.
Mönkemüller KE; Fry LC; Jones BH; Wells C; Mikolaenko I; Eloubeidi M
Endoscopy; 2004 May; 36(5):432-6. PubMed ID: 15100953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Technical aspects in endoscopic biopsy of lesions in esophageal pemphigus vulgaris.
Galloro G; Diamantis G; Magno L; Inzirillo M; Mignogna MC; Mignogna C; De Rosa G; Iovino P
Dig Liver Dis; 2007 Apr; 39(4):363-7. PubMed ID: 17307037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. [Comparison of hot versus cold biopsy forceps in the diagnosis of endobronchial lesions].
Firoozbakhsh S; Seifirad S; Safavi E; Dinparast R; Taslimi S; Derakhshandeilami G
Arch Bronconeumol; 2011 Nov; 47(11):547-51. PubMed ID: 22036191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
