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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17488393)

  • 1. Renal transplant incision closure using new absorbable subcuticular staple device.
    Tellis VA
    Clin Transplant; 2007; 21(3):410-2. PubMed ID: 17488393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A randomized, prospective study of total hip wound closure with resorbable subcuticular staples.
    Fisher DA; Bengero LL; Clapp BC; Burgess M
    Orthopedics; 2010 Sep; 33(9):665. PubMed ID: 20839703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Skin closure with subcuticular absorbable staples after cesarean section is associated with decreased analgesic use.
    Nitsche J; Howell C; Howell T
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2012 Apr; 285(4):979-83. PubMed ID: 22037686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A new suture for hair transplantation: poliglecaprone 25.
    Bernstein RM; Rassman WR; Rashid N
    Dermatol Surg; 2001 Jan; 27(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 11231232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An initial evaluation of subcuticular skin closure with absorbable intradermal pins.
    Meinke AK
    Conn Med; 1996 Apr; 60(4):199-202. PubMed ID: 8776122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of incision closures with subcuticular and percutaneous staples.
    Dresner HS; Hilger PA
    Arch Facial Plast Surg; 2009; 11(5):320-6. PubMed ID: 19797094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Absorbable subcuticular staples versus suture for caesarean section closure: a randomised clinical trial.
    Madsen AM; Dow ML; Lohse CM; Tessmer-Tuck JA
    BJOG; 2019 Mar; 126(4):502-510. PubMed ID: 30461155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Closure of Pfannenstiel skin incisions. Staples vs. subcuticular suture.
    Frishman GN; Schwartz T; Hogan JW
    J Reprod Med; 1997 Oct; 42(10):627-30. PubMed ID: 9350017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Wound complications in joint arthroplasty: comparing traditional and modern methods of skin closure.
    Patel RM; Cayo M; Patel A; Albarillo M; Puri L
    Orthopedics; 2012 May; 35(5):e641-6. PubMed ID: 22588404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of new absorbable Lactomer subcuticular staple.
    Zachmann GC; Foresman PA; Bill TJ; Bentrem DJ; Rodeheaver GT; Edlich RF
    J Appl Biomater; 1994; 5(3):221-6. PubMed ID: 10147448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of gross and histologic tissue responses of skin incisions closed by use of absorbable subcuticular staples, cutaneous metal staples, and polyglactin 910 suture in pigs.
    Fick JL; Novo RE; Kirchhof N
    Am J Vet Res; 2005 Nov; 66(11):1975-84. PubMed ID: 16334959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Placement of Absorbable Dermal Staples in Mammaplasty and Abdominoplasty: A 12-Month Prospective Study of 60 Patients.
    Bron T; Zakine G
    Aesthet Surg J; 2016 Apr; 36(4):459-68. PubMed ID: 26530478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A revolutionary advance in skin closure compared to current methods.
    Piñeros-Fernandez A; Salopek LS; Rodeheaver PF; Drake DB; Edlich RF; Rodeheaver GT
    J Long Term Eff Med Implants; 2006; 16(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 16566742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Value of absorbable stapling in digestive surgery? Experimental study comparing TA metallic stapling, TA absorbable stapling and manual sutures].
    Lehur PA; Gaillard F; Visset J
    J Chir (Paris); 1986 Oct; 123(10):563-9. PubMed ID: 3805171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: Running Subcuticular Closure Enables the Most Robust Perfusion After TKA: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Wyles CC; Jacobson SR; Houdek MT; Larson DR; Taunton MJ; Sim FH; Sierra RJ; Trousdale RT
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Jan; 474(1):47-56. PubMed ID: 25733009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Incidence of wound complications in cesarean deliveries following closure with absorbable subcuticular staples versus conventional skin closure techniques.
    Schrufer-Poland TL; Ruiz MP; Kassar S; Tomassian C; Algren SD; Yeast JD
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Nov; 206():53-56. PubMed ID: 27632411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Randomised trial of subcuticular suture versus metal clips for wound closure after thyroid and parathyroid surgery.
    Selvadurai D; Wildin C; Treharne G; Choksy SA; Heywood MM; Nicholson ML
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 1997 Jul; 79(4):303-6. PubMed ID: 9244079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Use of skin glue versus traditional wound closure methods in brain surgery: A prospective, randomized, controlled study.
    Chibbaro S; Tacconi L
    J Clin Neurosci; 2009 Apr; 16(4):535-9. PubMed ID: 19231198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The influence of absorbable subcuticular staples, continuous subcuticular absorbable suture, and percutaneous metal skin staples on infection in contaminated wounds.
    Pineros-Fernandez A; Salopek LS; Rodeheaver PF; Rodeheaver G
    J Long Term Eff Med Implants; 2012; 22(2):145-55. PubMed ID: 23428250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Subcuticular sutures versus staples for skin closure after open gastrointestinal surgery: a phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.
    Tsujinaka T; Yamamoto K; Fujita J; Endo S; Kawada J; Nakahira S; Shimokawa T; Kobayashi S; Yamasaki M; Akamaru Y; Miyamoto A; Mizushima T; Shimizu J; Umeshita K; Ito T; Doki Y; Mori M;
    Lancet; 2013 Sep; 382(9898):1105-12. PubMed ID: 24075050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.