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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1622904)

  • 1. A randomized prospective study comparing delivery with metal and silicone rubber vacuum extractor cups.
    Chenoy R; Johanson R
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1992 May; 99(5):360-3. PubMed ID: 1622904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of vacuum extraction delivery between the conventional metal cup and the new soft rubber cup.
    Srisomboon J; Piyamongkol W; Sahapong V; Mongkolchaipak S
    J Med Assoc Thai; 1998 Jul; 81(7):480-6. PubMed ID: 9676083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A multicentre randomized trial comparing delivery with a silicone rubber cup and rigid metal vacuum extractor cups.
    Cohn M; Barclay C; Fraser R; Zaklama M; Johanson R; Anderson D; Walker C
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1989 May; 96(5):545-51. PubMed ID: 2667629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison between metal cup and silicone rubber cup vacuum extractor.
    Loghis C; Pyrgiotis E; Panayotopoulos N; Batalias L; Salamalekis E; Zourlas PA
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 1992 Jul; 45(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 1511762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A randomised controlled trial of two instruments for vacuum-assisted delivery (Vacca Re-Usable OmniCup and the Bird anterior and posterior cups) to compare failure rates, safety and use effectiveness.
    Mola GD; Kuk JM
    Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2010 Jun; 50(3):246-52. PubMed ID: 20618242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Vacuum extraction: a randomized controlled comparison of the New Generation cup with the original Bird cup.
    Carmody F; Grant A; Somchiwong M
    J Perinat Med; 1986; 14(2):95-100. PubMed ID: 3735050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Choice of instruments for assisted vaginal delivery.
    O'Mahony F; Hofmeyr GJ; Menon V
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2010 Nov; (11):CD005455. PubMed ID: 21069686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical impact of the disposable ventouse iCup® versus a metallic vacuum cup: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
    Equy V; David-Tchouda S; Dreyfus M; Riethmuller D; Vendittelli F; Cabaud V; Langer B; Margier J; Bosson JL; Schaal JP
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2015 Dec; 15():332. PubMed ID: 26666981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Kiwi Omnicup versus Malmstrom metal cup in vacuum assisted delivery: a randomized comparative trial.
    Ismail NA; Saharan WS; Zaleha MA; Jaafar R; Muhammad JA; Razi ZR
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2008 Jun; 34(3):350-3. PubMed ID: 18686348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A randomised controlled trial of a new handheld vacuum extraction device.
    Attilakos G; Sibanda T; Winter C; Johnson N; Draycott T
    BJOG; 2005 Nov; 112(11):1510-5. PubMed ID: 16225571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A randomised prospective study comparing the new vacuum extractor policy with forceps delivery.
    Johanson RB; Rice C; Doyle M; Arthur J; Anyanwu L; Ibrahim J; Warwick A; Redman CW; O'Brien PM
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1993 Jun; 100(6):524-30. PubMed ID: 8334086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A randomized comparison of vacuum extraction delivery with a rigid and a pliable cup.
    Kuit JA; Eppinga HG; Wallenburg HC; Huikeshoven FJ
    Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Aug; 82(2):280-4. PubMed ID: 8336878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical experience with the Silc Cup Vacuum Extractor.
    Low J; Ng TY; Chew SY
    Singapore Med J; 1993 Apr; 34(2):135-8. PubMed ID: 8266153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Vacuum delivery at The Maternity Hospital Kuala Lumpur: a comparison of metal and silicone cups.
    Lee HY; Subramaniam N; Nordin MM
    Singapore Med J; 1996 Feb; 37(1):55-60. PubMed ID: 8783915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A prospective randomised controlled trial of the Kiwi Omnicup versus conventional ventouse cups for vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery.
    Groom KM; Jones BA; Miller N; Paterson-Brown S
    BJOG; 2006 Feb; 113(2):183-9. PubMed ID: 16411996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Soft versus rigid vacuum extractor cups for assisted vaginal delivery.
    Johanson R; Menon V
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2000; (2):CD000446. PubMed ID: 10796203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Vacuum-assisted delivery.
    Vacca A
    Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 2002 Feb; 16(1):17-30. PubMed ID: 11866494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cup detachment during vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery and birth outcome.
    Krispin E; Aviram A; Salman L; Chen R; Wiznitzer A; Gabbay-Benziv R
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 Nov; 296(5):877-883. PubMed ID: 28871450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical assessment of the Kobayashi vacuum extractor.
    Maryniak GM; Frank JB
    Obstet Gynecol; 1984 Sep; 64(3):431-5. PubMed ID: 6462575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A randomized comparison of assisted vaginal delivery by obstetric forceps and polyethylene vacuum cup.
    Williams MC; Knuppel RA; O'Brien WF; Weiss A; Kanarek KS
    Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Nov; 78(5 Pt 1):789-94. PubMed ID: 1923198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.