295 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17100971)
1. Wireless esophageal pH monitoring is better tolerated than the catheter-based technique: results from a randomized cross-over trial.
Wenner J; Johnsson F; Johansson J; Oberg S
Am J Gastroenterol; 2007 Feb; 102(2):239-45. PubMed ID: 17100971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Feasibility and tolerability of transnasal/per-oral placement of the wireless pH capsule vs. traditional 24-h oesophageal pH monitoring--a randomized trial.
Wong WM; Bautista J; Dekel R; Malagon IB; Tuchinsky I; Green C; Dickman R; Esquivel R; Fass R
Aliment Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Jan; 21(2):155-63. PubMed ID: 15679765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Wireless pH monitoring: better tolerability and lower impact on daily habits.
Grigolon A; Bravi I; Cantù P; Conte D; Penagini R
Dig Liver Dis; 2007 Aug; 39(8):720-4. PubMed ID: 17602906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 48-hour wireless oesophageal pH-monitoring in children: are two days better than one?
Gunnarsdóttir A; Stenström P; Arnbjörnsson E
Eur J Pediatr Surg; 2007 Dec; 17(6):378-81. PubMed ID: 18072019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Oesophageal pH monitoring using the Bravo catheter-free radio capsule.
Gillies RS; Stratford JM; Booth MI; Dehn TC
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2007 Jan; 19(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 17206078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of wireless 48-h (Bravo) versus traditional ambulatory 24-h esophageal pH monitoring.
Håkanson BS; Berggren P; Granqvist S; Ljungqvist O; Thorell A
Scand J Gastroenterol; 2009; 44(3):276-83. PubMed ID: 19040176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Efficacy, diagnostic utility and tolerance of intraesophageal pH ambulatory determination with wireless pH-testing monitoring system].
Carmona-Sánchez R; Solana-Sentíes S
Rev Gastroenterol Mex; 2004; 69(2):69-75. PubMed ID: 15757154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of data obtained from sedated versus unsedated wireless telemetry capsule placement: does sedation affect the results of ambulatory 48-hour pH testing?
Belafsky PC; Godin DA; Garcia JC; Rahim N
Laryngoscope; 2005 Jun; 115(6):1109-13. PubMed ID: 15933532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 24 Versus 48-hour bravo pH monitoring.
Chander B; Hanley-Williams N; Deng Y; Sheth A
J Clin Gastroenterol; 2012 Mar; 46(3):197-200. PubMed ID: 21959323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Catheter-free pH-metry using the Bravo capsule versus standard pH-metry in patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD)].
Mönkemüller K; Neumann H; Fry LC; Kolfenbach S; Malfertheiner P
Z Gastroenterol; 2009 Apr; 47(4):351-6. PubMed ID: 19358061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Wireless capsule pH monitoring: does it fulfil all expectations?
Maerten P; Ortner M; Michetti P; Dorta G
Digestion; 2007; 76(3-4):235-40. PubMed ID: 18174686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Wireless pH recording immediately above the squamocolumnar junction improves the diagnostic performance of esophageal pH studies.
Wenner J; Hall M; Höglund P; Johansson J; Johnsson F; Oberg S
Am J Gastroenterol; 2008 Dec; 103(12):2977-85. PubMed ID: 18786112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring using a wireless system.
Pandolfino JE; Richter JE; Ours T; Guardino JM; Chapman J; Kahrilas PJ
Am J Gastroenterol; 2003 Apr; 98(4):740-9. PubMed ID: 12738450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Subcardial 24-h wireless pH monitoring in gastroesophageal reflux disease patients with and without hiatal hernia compared with healthy subjects.
Grigolon A; Cantú P; Bravi I; Caparello C; Penagini R
Am J Gastroenterol; 2009 Nov; 104(11):2714-20. PubMed ID: 19638965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy and tolerability of the Bravo catheter-free pH capsule in patients between the ages of 4 and 18 years.
Croffie JM; Fitzgerald JF; Molleston JP; Gupta SK; Corkins MR; Pfefferkorn MD; Lim JR; Steiner SJ; Dadzie SK
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr; 2007 Nov; 45(5):559-63. PubMed ID: 18030233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Patient acceptance and clinical impact of Bravo monitoring in patients with previous failed catheter-based studies.
Sweis R; Fox M; Anggiansah R; Anggiansah A; Basavaraju K; Canavan R; Wong T
Aliment Pharmacol Ther; 2009 Mar; 29(6):669-76. PubMed ID: 19183144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring and symptom analysis in GERD: a study in patients off and on therapy.
Zerbib F; Roman S; Ropert A; des Varannes SB; Pouderoux P; Chaput U; Mion F; Vérin E; Galmiche JP; Sifrim D
Am J Gastroenterol; 2006 Sep; 101(9):1956-63. PubMed ID: 16848801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring in patients with therapy-resistant reflux symptoms: 'on' or 'off' proton pump inhibitor?
Hemmink GJ; Bredenoord AJ; Weusten BL; Monkelbaan JF; Timmer R; Smout AJ
Am J Gastroenterol; 2008 Oct; 103(10):2446-53. PubMed ID: 18684197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of prolonged pH measurements on the diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease: 4-day wireless pH studies.
Scarpulla G; Camilleri S; Galante P; Manganaro M; Fox M
Am J Gastroenterol; 2007 Dec; 102(12):2642-7. PubMed ID: 17850412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. New developments in detection of gastroesophageal reflux.
Emerenziani S; Sifrim D
Curr Opin Gastroenterol; 2005 Jul; 21(4):450-3. PubMed ID: 15930987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
