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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22219062)

  • 1. Menometrorrhagia in magnetic resonance imaging operators with copper intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUDS): a case report.
    Gobba F; Bianchi N; Verga P; Contessa GM; Rossi P
    Int J Occup Med Environ Health; 2012 Mar; 25(1):97-102. PubMed ID: 22219062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Health effects of occupational exposure to static magnetic fields used in magnetic resonance imaging: a review].
    Franco G; Perduri R; Murolo A
    Med Lav; 2008; 99(1):16-28. PubMed ID: 18254536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Experimental evaluation of the occupational exposure to static magnetic fields on a 3 T magnetic resonance scanner].
    Moro L; Alabiso F; Parisoli F; Frigerio F
    G Ital Med Lav Ergon; 2013; 35(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 23798231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A survey on abnormal uterine bleeding among radiographers with frequent MRI exposure using intrauterine contraceptive devices.
    Huss A; Schaap K; Kromhout H
    Magn Reson Med; 2018 Feb; 79(2):1083-1089. PubMed ID: 28444812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Intrauterine devices.
    Mccarthy TG; Ratnam SS
    Contemp Rev Obstet Gynaecol; 1992 Oct; 4(4):215-22. PubMed ID: 12345158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Inventory of MRI applications and workers exposed to MRI-related electromagnetic fields in the Netherlands.
    Schaap K; Christopher-De Vries Y; Slottje P; Kromhout H
    Eur J Radiol; 2013 Dec; 82(12):2279-85. PubMed ID: 24055183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Exposure to static and time-varying magnetic fields from working in the static magnetic stray fields of MRI scanners: a comprehensive survey in the Netherlands.
    Schaap K; Christopher-De Vries Y; Crozier S; De Vocht F; Kromhout H
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2014 Nov; 58(9):1094-110. PubMed ID: 25139484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Exposure to static magnetic field and health hazards during the operation of magnetic resonance scanners].
    Karpowicz J; Gryz K; Politański P; Zmyślony M
    Med Pr; 2011; 62(3):309-21. PubMed ID: 21870421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Safety of intrauterine devices in MRI.
    Bussmann S; Luechinger R; Froehlich JM; von Weymarn C; Reischauer C; Koh DM; Gutzeit A
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(10):e0204220. PubMed ID: 30300364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Intrauterine devices: an effective alternative to oral hormonal contraception.
    Prescrire Int; 2009 Jun; 18(101):125-30. PubMed ID: 19637436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Exposure of nurses to electromagnetic fields].
    Zmyślony M; Mamrot P; Politański P
    Med Pr; 2004; 55(2):183-7. PubMed ID: 15524087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The end of IUD marketing in the United States: what does it mean for American women?].
    Forrest JD
    Contracept Fertil Sex (Paris); 1987 Mar; 15(3):291-300. PubMed ID: 12341479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. New studies link IUDs, infertility; say copper devices safer.
    Contracept Technol Update; 1985 Jun; 6(6):81-3. PubMed ID: 12313655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intrauterine devices. The optimal long-term contraceptive method?
    Fortney JA; Feldblum PJ; Raymond EG
    J Reprod Med; 1999 Mar; 44(3):269-74. PubMed ID: 10202746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Evaluation of the occupational risk related to exposure to electromagnetic fields according to the EC Directive 2004/40 EC: exposure during pregnancy].
    Gobba F; Tavani M; Bianchi N
    G Ital Med Lav Ergon; 2007; 29(3 Suppl):779-80. PubMed ID: 18409957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risk assessment of copper-containing contraceptives: the impact for women with implanted intrauterine devices during clinical MRI and CT examinations.
    Neumann W; Uhrig T; Malzacher M; Kossmann V; Schad LR; Zoellner FG
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Jun; 29(6):2812-2820. PubMed ID: 30456586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Current concepts on the use of IUDs.
    McCarthy T
    Singapore Med J; 1989 Aug; 30(4):390-2. PubMed ID: 2814545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Long-term cytologic studies of copper-IUD users.
    Engineer AD; Misra JS; Tandon P
    Acta Cytol; 1981; 25(5):550-6. PubMed ID: 6945020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Performances of copper T 380A and multiload copper 375/250 intrauterine contraceptive devices in a comparative clinical trial.
    Arowojolu AO; Otolorin EO; Ladipo OA
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 1995 Mar; 24(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 7495202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Enhanced endometrial response to a magnetic intrauterine device: a preliminary study.
    Celik O; Ugras M; Hascalik S; Aydin NE; Abbasov T
    Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care; 2009 Dec; 14(6):437-43. PubMed ID: 19929647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.