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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21906191)

  • 21. Pharmacokinetics of anti-D IgG in pregnant RhD-negative women.
    Bichler J; Schöndorfer G; Pabst G; Andresen I
    BJOG; 2003 Jan; 110(1):39-45. PubMed ID: 12504934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Antenatal anti-Rh(D) antigen prophylaxis].
    Katsulov A;
    Akush Ginekol (Sofiia); 2001; 40 Suppl 5():3-7. PubMed ID: 11785354
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. An increased risk for non allo-immunization related intrauterine fetal death in RhD-negative patients.
    Ben-David G; Sheiner E; Levy A; Erez O; Mazor M
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2008 Apr; 21(4):255-9. PubMed ID: 18330822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [The importance of antenatal immunoprophylaxis for prevention of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn].
    Starcević M; Mataija M; Sović D; Dodig J; Matijević R; Kukuruzović M
    Acta Med Croatica; 2011 Mar; 65(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 21568074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Risk factors for RhD immunisation despite antenatal and postnatal anti-D prophylaxis.
    Koelewijn JM; de Haas M; Vrijkotte TG; van der Schoot CE; Bonsel GJ
    BJOG; 2009 Sep; 116(10):1307-14. PubMed ID: 19538414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Controlled trial of various anti-D dosages in suppression of Rh sensitization following pregnancy. Report to the Medical Research Council by the working party on the use of anti-D-immunoglobulin for the prevention of isoimmunization of Rh-negative women during pregnancy.
    Br Med J; 1974 Apr; 2(5910):75-80. PubMed ID: 4207590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [Comparison of the efficacy of different methods for the prevention of anti-D allo-immunization during pregnancy: targeted strategy limited to risk situations or associated with systematic prevention in the 3rd trimester].
    Parant O
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2006 Feb; 35(1 Suppl):1S93-1S103. PubMed ID: 16495834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Commentary on Keidan 2012: routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis - is the protection adequate?
    Bolton-Maggs P
    Transfus Med; 2012 Jun; 22(3):155. PubMed ID: 22429406
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. On the immunologic basis of Rh immune globulin (anti-D) prophylaxis.
    Kumpel BM
    Transfusion; 2006 Sep; 46(9):1652-6. PubMed ID: 16965599
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Rhesus prophylaxis--history and current status].
    Behrens O; Lellé RJ
    Zentralbl Gynakol; 1997; 119(5):204-10. PubMed ID: 9281253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The scientific basis of antenatal prophylaxis.
    Urbaniak SJ
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1998 Nov; 105 Suppl 18():11-8. PubMed ID: 9863973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A curious case of anti-D antibody titer.
    Hensley JG; Coughlin KP; Klein LL
    J Midwifery Womens Health; 2009; 54(6):497-502. PubMed ID: 19879523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Costs and clinical outcomes of noninvasive fetal RhD typing for targeted prophylaxis.
    Hawk AF; Chang EY; Shields SM; Simpson KN
    Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Sep; 122(3):579-85. PubMed ID: 23921866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Epidemiology of anti-D allo-immunization during pregnancy].
    Branger B; Winer N
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2006 Feb; 35(1 Suppl):1S87-1S92. PubMed ID: 16495833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The use of anti-D immunoglobulins for rhesus prophylaxis: audit on knowledge and practices among obstetricians.
    Wee WW; Kanagalingam D
    Singapore Med J; 2009 Nov; 50(11):1054-7. PubMed ID: 19960158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evidence to support the single-dose over the two-dose protocol for routine antenatal anti-D Rhesus prophylaxis: a prospective observational study.
    MacKenzie IZ; Dutton S; Roseman F
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2011 Sep; 158(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 21641101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Appropriate provision of anti-D prophylaxis to RhD negative pregnant women: a scoping review.
    Fyfe TM; Ritchey MJ; Taruc C; Crompton D; Galliford B; Perrin R
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2014 Dec; 14():411. PubMed ID: 25491600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Clinical validation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis questions the modelling predictions adopted by NICE for Rhesus D sensitisation rates: results of a longitudinal study.
    Mackenzie IZ; Roseman F; Findlay J; Thompson K; McPherson K
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2008 Jul; 139(1):38-42. PubMed ID: 18243487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Adverse effects and patient information].
    Cortey A; Brossard Y
    J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2006 Feb; 35(1 Suppl):1S112-1S118. PubMed ID: 16495836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Incidence of maternal sensitisation to Rh(D) in Christchurch, New Zealand and reasons for prophylaxis failures.
    Badami KG; Parker J; Kenny A; Warrington S
    N Z Med J; 2014 Jan; 127(1388):40-6. PubMed ID: 24481385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.