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.
130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2009065)
21. Cost-effectiveness analysis of routine frozen-section analysis of breast margins compared with reoperation for positive margins. Osborn JB; Keeney GL; Jakub JW; Degnim AC; Boughey JC Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Oct; 18(11):3204-9. PubMed ID: 21861234 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A comparison of touch imprint cytology and Mohs frozen-section histology in the evaluation of Mohs micrographic surgical margins. Florell SR; Layfield LJ; Gerwels JW J Am Acad Dermatol; 2001 Apr; 44(4):660-4. PubMed ID: 11260543 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Use of touch preps for diagnosis and evaluation of surgical margins in breast cancer. Klimberg VS; Westbrook KC; Korourian S Ann Surg Oncol; 1998; 5(3):220-6. PubMed ID: 9607622 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Close/positive margins after breast-conserving therapy: additional resection or no resection? Wood WC Breast; 2013 Aug; 22 Suppl 2():S115-7. PubMed ID: 24074771 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Analysis of residual cancer after diagnostic breast biopsy: an argument for fine-needle aspiration cytology. Cox CE; Reintgen DS; Nicosia SV; Ku NN; Baekey P; Carey LC Ann Surg Oncol; 1995 May; 2(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 7641015 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Is intraoperative frozen section analysis of reexcision specimens of value in preventing reoperation in breast-conserving therapy? Jorns JM; Daignault S; Sabel MS; Wu AJ Am J Clin Pathol; 2014 Nov; 142(5):601-8. PubMed ID: 25319974 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Should intraoperative frozen section evaluation of breast lumpectomy margins become routine practice? Schnitt SJ; Morrow M Am J Clin Pathol; 2012 Nov; 138(5):635-8. PubMed ID: 23086762 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparing touch imprint cytology, frozen section analysis, and cytokeratin immunostaining for intraoperative evaluation of axillary sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Safai A; Razeghi A; Monabati A; Azarpira N; Talei A Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 2012; 55(2):183-6. PubMed ID: 22771640 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Fine-needle aspiration and cytologic findings of surgical scar lesions in women with breast cancer. Malberger E; Edoute Y; Toledano O; Sapir D Cancer; 1992 Jan; 69(1):148-52. PubMed ID: 1727657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The influence of additional surgical margins on the total specimen volume excised and the reoperative rate after breast-conserving surgery. Huston TL; Pigalarga R; Osborne MP; Tousimis E Am J Surg; 2006 Oct; 192(4):509-12. PubMed ID: 16978962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence. Olson TP; Harter J; Muñoz A; Mahvi DM; Breslin T Ann Surg Oncol; 2007 Oct; 14(10):2953-60. PubMed ID: 17674109 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Cytology as an alternative to frozen section at the time of nephron-sparing surgery to evaluate surgical margin status. Palermo SM; Dechet C; Trenti E; Mian C; Lodde M; Comploj E; Mazzoleni G; Hanspeter E; Ambrosini Spaltro A; Mayr R; Pycha A Urology; 2013 Nov; 82(5):1071-5. PubMed ID: 24044918 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Frozen-section-guided breast-conserving surgery: implications of diagnosis by frozen section as a guide to determining the extent of resection. Ikeda T; Enomoto K; Wada K; Takeshima K; Yoneyama K; Furukawa J; Watanabe Y; Mukai M; Kitajima M Surg Today; 1997; 27(3):207-12. PubMed ID: 9068099 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Lumpectomy margins, reexcision, and local recurrence of breast cancer. Tartter PI; Kaplan J; Bleiweiss I; Gajdos C; Kong A; Ahmed S; Zapetti D Am J Surg; 2000 Feb; 179(2):81-5. PubMed ID: 10773138 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The MarginProbe® System: An Innovative Approach to Reduce the Incidence of Positive Margins Found After Lumpectomy. Gola S; Doyle-Lindrud S Clin J Oncol Nurs; 2016 Dec; 20(6):598-599. PubMed ID: 27857263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Impact of analysis of frozen-section margin on reoperation rates in women undergoing lumpectomy for breast cancer: evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. Boughey JC; Hieken TJ; Jakub JW; Degnim AC; Grant CS; Farley DR; Thomsen KM; Osborn JB; Keeney GL; Habermann EB Surgery; 2014 Jul; 156(1):190-7. PubMed ID: 24929768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Accuracy of intraoperative frozen-section analysis of breast cancer lumpectomy-bed margins. Cendán JC; Coco D; Copeland EM J Am Coll Surg; 2005 Aug; 201(2):194-8. PubMed ID: 16038815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Aziz D; Rawlinson E; Narod SA; Sun P; Lickley HL; McCready DR; Holloway CM Breast J; 2006; 12(4):331-7. PubMed ID: 16848842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The usefulness of touch preparation cytological evaluation and prostatic capsule involvement in prediction of prostate cancer recurrence. Brannigan RE; Shin E; Rademaker A; Oyasu R; Huang CF; Pearle MS; McVary KT J Urol; 1998 Nov; 160(5):1741-7. PubMed ID: 9783944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Malignant seeding of the lumpectomy cavity upon breast-conserving surgery. Motomura K; Koyama H; Noguchi S; Inaji H; Kasugai T; Nagumo S Oncology; 1999; 57(2):121-6. PubMed ID: 10461058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]