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 *

245 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21361823)

  • 1. The digital flexible ureteroscope: in vitro assessment of optical characteristics.
    Zilberman DE; Lipkin ME; Ferrandino MN; Simmons WN; Mancini JG; Raymundo ME; Zhong P; Preminger GM
    J Endourol; 2011 Mar; 25(3):519-22. PubMed ID: 21361823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of a Novel Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscope.
    Dale J; Kaplan AG; Radvak D; Shin R; Ackerman A; Chen T; Scales CD; Ferrandino MN; Simmons WN; Preminger GM; Lipkin ME
    J Endourol; 2021 Jun; 35(6):903-907. PubMed ID: 27981862
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Next-Generation Single-Use Ureteroscopes: An In Vitro Comparison.
    Tom WR; Wollin DA; Jiang R; Radvak D; Simmons WN; Preminger GM; Lipkin ME
    J Endourol; 2017 Dec; 31(12):1301-1306. PubMed ID: 28978227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. In vitro comparison of a disposable flexible ureteroscope and conventional flexible ureteroscopes.
    Boylu U; Oommen M; Thomas R; Lee BR
    J Urol; 2009 Nov; 182(5):2347-51. PubMed ID: 19758626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of optics and performance of single channel and a novel dual-channel fiberoptic ureteroscope.
    Lusch A; Okhunov Z; del Junco M; Yoon R; Khanipour R; Menhadji A; Landman J
    Urology; 2015 Jan; 85(1):268-72. PubMed ID: 25530400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of flexible ureteroscopes: deflection, irrigant flow and optical characteristics.
    Abdelshehid C; Ahlering MT; Chou D; Park HK; Basillote J; Lee D; Kim I; Eichel L; Protsenko D; Wong B; McDougall E; Clayman RV
    J Urol; 2005 Jun; 173(6):2017-21. PubMed ID: 15879808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Conventional fiberoptic flexible ureteroscope versus fourth generation digital flexible ureteroscope: a critical comparison.
    Multescu R; Geavlete B; Georgescu D; Geavlete P
    J Endourol; 2010 Jan; 24(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 19954350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The "Body Mass Index" of Flexible Ureteroscopes.
    Proietti S; Somani B; Sofer M; Pietropaolo A; Rosso M; Saitta G; Gaboardi F; Traxer O; Giusti G
    J Endourol; 2017 Oct; 31(10):1090-1095. PubMed ID: 28835120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Independent analysis of Olympus flexible ureteroscope repairs.
    Canales BK; Gleason JM; Hicks N; Monga M
    Urology; 2007 Jul; 70(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 17656198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. In vitro and in vivo comparison of optics and performance of a distal sensor ureteroscope versus a standard fiberoptic ureteroscope.
    Lusch A; Abdelshehid C; Hidas G; Osann KE; Okhunov Z; McDougall E; Landman J
    J Endourol; 2013 Jul; 27(7):896-902. PubMed ID: 23402369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of the physical properties of four new generation flexible ureteroscopes: (de)flection, flow properties, torsion stiffness, and optical characteristics.
    Paffen ML; Keizer JG; de Winter GV; Arends AJ; Hendrikx AJ
    J Endourol; 2008 Oct; 22(10):2227-34. PubMed ID: 18831670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Micro-Costing Analysis Demonstrates Comparable Costs for LithoVue Compared to Reusable Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes.
    Taguchi K; Usawachintachit M; Tzou DT; Sherer BA; Metzler I; Isaacson D; Stoller ML; Chi T
    J Endourol; 2018 Apr; 32(4):267-273. PubMed ID: 29239227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of New Single-Use Digital Flexible Ureteroscope Versus Nondisposable Fiber Optic and Digital Ureteroscope in a Cadaveric Model.
    Proietti S; Dragos L; Molina W; Doizi S; Giusti G; Traxer O
    J Endourol; 2016 Jun; 30(6):655-9. PubMed ID: 27084572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Single-use disposable digital flexible ureteroscopes: an ex vivo assessment and cost analysis.
    Hennessey DB; Fojecki GL; Papa NP; Lawrentschuk N; Bolton D
    BJU Int; 2018 May; 121 Suppl 3():55-61. PubMed ID: 29656467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Prospective evaluation of flexible ureteroscopes with a novel evaluation tool.
    Bell JR; Penniston KL; Best SL; Nakada SY
    Can J Urol; 2017 Oct; 24(5):9004-9010. PubMed ID: 28971788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing 2 Flexible Digital Ureteroscopes: ACMI/Olympus Invisio DUR-D and Olympus URF-V.
    Shah K; Monga M; Knudsen B
    Urology; 2015 Jun; 85(6):1267-71. PubMed ID: 25711157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Which flexible ureteroscope is the best for upper tract urothelial carcinoma treatment?
    Keller EX; Doizi S; Villa L; Traxer O
    World J Urol; 2019 Nov; 37(11):2325-2333. PubMed ID: 30770944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Flexible endoscope deflectability: changes using a variety of working instruments and laser fibers.
    Poon M; Beaghler M; Baldwin D
    J Endourol; 1997 Aug; 11(4):247-9. PubMed ID: 9376842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Physical properties of flexible ureteroscopes: implications for clinical practice.
    Monga M; Anderson KJ; Durfee W
    J Endourol; 2004 Jun; 18(5):462-5. PubMed ID: 15253821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Rapid communication: effects of Steris 1 sterilization and Cidex ortho-phthalaldehyde high-level disinfection on durability of new-generation flexible ureteroscopes.
    Abraham JB; Abdelshehid CS; Lee HJ; Box GN; Deane LA; Le T; Jellison F; Borin JF; Manipon A; McDougall EM; Clayman RV
    J Endourol; 2007 Sep; 21(9):985-92. PubMed ID: 17941773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.