206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18702329)
1. [The comparison of reactions in skin prick test performed with the standardized lancet and the injection needle].
Semik-Orzech A; Barczyk A; Pierzchała W
Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2008 Jun; 24(144):495-501. PubMed ID: 18702329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Skin reactivity in the histamine-equivalent skin test in hypersensitivity to grass pollen].
Paranos S; Petrović S; Bojović I
Srp Arh Celok Lek; 2000; 128(5-6):194-9. PubMed ID: 11089421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Precision and economy of skin prick tests].
Kupczyk M; Kupryś I; Kuna P
Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2002 Mar; 12(69):190-3. PubMed ID: 12053585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Comparative study of 3 types of lancets for performing prick tests].
Montalvo A; Martín S; Mesa A; Cortés C; Rodríguez M; Laso MT
Allergol Immunopathol (Madr); 1996; 24(2):58-64. PubMed ID: 8992889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of devices for skin prick testing.
Nelson HS; Lahr J; Buchmeier A; McCormick D
J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1998 Feb; 101(2 Pt 1):153-6. PubMed ID: 9500746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of two disposable plastic skin test devices with the bifurcated needle for epicutaneous allergy testing.
Corder WT; Hogan MB; Wilson NW
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 1996 Sep; 77(3):222-6. PubMed ID: 8814048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of standard and modified SPT method.
Zawodniak A; Kupczyk M; Górski P; Kuna P
Allergy; 2003 Mar; 58(3):257-9. PubMed ID: 12653802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of three methods of using the DermaPIK with the standard prick method for epicutaneous skin testing.
Corder WT; Wilson NW
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol; 1995 Nov; 75(5):434-8. PubMed ID: 7583866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The results of skin prick testing in patients with allergic rhinitis: a comparison between a multiple lancet device and a single lancet.
Ateş A; Kinikli G; Turgay M; Aydoğan N; Duman M
Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol; 2004; 22(2-3):109-14. PubMed ID: 15565947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of application of multiple needle pricks on the pathergy reaction.
Ozdemir M; Bodur S; Engin B; Baysal I
Int J Dermatol; 2008 Apr; 47(4):335-8. PubMed ID: 18377594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Skin prick test responses to codeine, histamine, and ragweed utilizing the Multitest device.
Lin RY; Erlich ER; Don PC
Ann Allergy; 1990 Sep; 65(3):222-6. PubMed ID: 2403228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Critical evaluation of the use of skin tests and cellular tests in standardization of allergens.
de Weck AL; Derer T
Arb Paul Ehrlich Inst Bundesamt Sera Impfstoffe Frankf A M; 1994; (87):89-114; discussion 114-7. PubMed ID: 7873071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of five techniques of skin prick tests used routinely in Europe.
Masse MS; Granger Vallée A; Chiriac A; Dhivert-Donnadieu H; Bousquet-Rouanet L; Bousquet PJ; Demoly P
Allergy; 2011 Nov; 66(11):1415-9. PubMed ID: 21797883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Comparison of two lancets in the skin prick test].
Castro Almarales RL; Primo Valdés SI; González León M; Navarro Viltre BI; Alvarez Castañeda M; Irarragorri Toledo C; Ronquillo Díaz M; García Gómez I; Labrada Rosado A
Rev Alerg Mex; 2005; 52(5):188-93. PubMed ID: 16579181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of distance between sites and region of the body on results of skin prick tests.
Nelson HS; Knoetzer J; Bucher B
J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1996 Feb; 97(2):596-601. PubMed ID: 8621844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of a new lancet and a hypodermic needle for skin prick testing.
Dirksen A; Mosbech H; Søborg M; Biering I
Allergy; 1983 Jul; 38(5):359-62. PubMed ID: 6614408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of skin prick location on the forearm using a novel skin prick automated test device.
Seys SF; Gorris S; Uyttebroek S; Backaert W; Jorissen M; Schrijvers R; Daems R; Loeckx D; Van Gerven L; Hellings PW
Front Allergy; 2023; 4():1289031. PubMed ID: 38026131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparative performance of five commercial prick skin test devices.
Nelson HS; Rosloniec DM; McCall LI; Iklé D
J Allergy Clin Immunol; 1993 Nov; 92(5):750-6. PubMed ID: 8227867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The Lancet Weight Determines Wheal Diameter in Response to Skin Prick Testing with Histamine.
Andersen HH; Lundgaard AC; Petersen AS; Hauberg LE; Sharma N; Hansen SD; Elberling J; Arendt-Nielsen L
PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0156211. PubMed ID: 27213613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [COMPARISON OF WHEAL SIZE INDUCED BY BIFURCATED NEEDLE
Masukane S; Matsui T; Tokumo N; Makino A; Kitamura K; Takasato Y; Sugiura S; Ito K
Arerugi; 2022; 71(5):389-396. PubMed ID: 35831164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
