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 *

733 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26530230)

  • 1. Flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) with holmium laser versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treatment of renal stone <2 cm: a meta-analysis.
    Mi Y; Ren K; Pan H; Zhu L; Wu S; You X; Shao H; Dai F; Peng T; Qin F; Wang J; Huang Y
    Urolithiasis; 2016 Aug; 44(4):353-65. PubMed ID: 26530230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm.
    El-Nahas AR; Ibrahim HM; Youssef RF; Sheir KZ
    BJU Int; 2012 Sep; 110(6):898-902. PubMed ID: 22372915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience.
    Hyams ES; Munver R; Bird VG; Uberoi J; Shah O
    J Endourol; 2010 Oct; 24(10):1583-8. PubMed ID: 20629566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery vs. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Lower Pole Renal Stones 10-20 mm : A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.
    Junbo L; Yugen L; Guo J; Jing H; Ruichao Y; Tao W
    Urol J; 2019 May; 16(2):97-106. PubMed ID: 30604405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Application of Flexible Holmium Laser Sheath in Rigid Ureteroscopy for the Treatment of Impacted Upper Ureteral Stones.
    Xiong Y; Liu J; Zhao T
    Arch Esp Urol; 2023 Feb; 76(1):50-55. PubMed ID: 36914419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Meta-analysis of Optimal Management of Lower Pole Stone of 10 - 20 mm: Flexible Ureteroscopy (FURS) versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) versus Percutaneus Nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
    Yuri P; Hariwibowo R; Soeroharjo I; Danarto R; Hendri AZ; Brodjonegoro SR; Rasyid N; Birowo P; Widyahening IS
    Acta Med Indones; 2018 Jan; 50(1):18-25. PubMed ID: 29686172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies.
    Arcaniolo D; De Sio M; Rassweiler J; Nicholas J; Lima E; Carrieri G; Liatsikos E; Mirone V; Monga M; Autorino R
    Urolithiasis; 2017 Dec; 45(6):563-572. PubMed ID: 28233025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Prospective comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus flexible ureterorenoscopy in patients with non-lower pole kidney stones under the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Bai S; Zhan Y; Pan C; Liu G; Li J; Shan L
    Urolithiasis; 2023 Feb; 51(1):38. PubMed ID: 36795174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Versus Flexible Ureteroscopy for the Management of Upper Tract Urinary Stones in Children.
    Freton L; Peyronnet B; Arnaud A; Tondut L; Hascoet J; Pradère B; Verhoest G; Habonimana É; Azzis O; Fremond B; Bensalah K
    J Endourol; 2017 Jan; 31(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 27824261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy vs. flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of urinary calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Lv G; Qi W; Gao H; Zhou Y; Zhong M; Wang K; Liu Y; Zhang Q; Zhou C; Li Y; Zhang L; Zhang D
    Front Surg; 2022; 9():925481. PubMed ID: 36420414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Efficiency and cost of treating proximal ureteral stones: shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy plus holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser.
    Parker BD; Frederick RW; Reilly TP; Lowry PS; Bird ET
    Urology; 2004 Dec; 64(6):1102-6; discussion 1106. PubMed ID: 15596177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative analysis of direct and indirect costs of two minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of renal/ureteral calculi smaller than 2 cm.
    Perez-Ardavin J; Lorenzo L; Caballer-Tarazona V; Budía-Alba A; Vivas-Consuelo D; Bahilo-Mateu P; Ordaz-Jurado G; Trassierra-Villa M; López-Acón JD; Boronat-Tormo F
    Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed); 2020 Sep; 44(7):505-511. PubMed ID: 32593640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of the Efficacy of Ultra-Mini PCNL, Flexible Ureteroscopy, and Shock Wave Lithotripsy on the Treatment of 1-2 cm Lower Pole Renal Calculi.
    Zhang H; Hong TY; Li G; Jiang N; Hu C; Cui X; Chu C; Zhao JL
    Urol Int; 2019; 102(2):153-159. PubMed ID: 30352443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Flexible Ureterorenoscopy versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the treatment of upper/middle calyx kidney stones of 10-20 mm: a retrospective analysis of 174 patients.
    Cecen K; Karadag MA; Demir A; Bagcioglu M; Kocaaslan R; Sofikerim M
    Springerplus; 2014; 3(1):557. PubMed ID: 25332859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children.
    Barreto L; Jung JH; Abdelrahim A; Ahmed M; Dawkins GPC; Kazmierski M
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Jun; 6(6):CD010784. PubMed ID: 29859007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment for renal stones 1-2 cm: a meta-analysis.
    Zheng C; Yang H; Luo J; Xiong B; Wang H; Jiang Q
    Urolithiasis; 2015 Nov; 43(6):549-56. PubMed ID: 26211003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison between retrograde intrarenal surgery and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm. Prospective, randomized study.
    Vilches RM; Aliaga A; Reyes D; Sepulveda F; Mercado A; Moya F; Ledezma R; Hidalgo JP; Olmedo T; Marchant F
    Actas Urol Esp; 2015 May; 39(4):236-42. PubMed ID: 25435403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Predictive factors for flexible ureterorenoscopy requirement after rigid ureterorenoscopy in cases with renal pelvic stones sized 1 to 2 cm.
    Süer E; Gülpinar Ö; Özcan C; Göğüş Ç; Kerimov S; Şafak M
    Korean J Urol; 2015 Feb; 56(2):138-42. PubMed ID: 25685301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi: extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy vs laser ureteroscopy. A comparison of costs, morbidity and effectiveness.
    Bierkens AF; Hendrikx AJ; De La Rosette JJ; Stultiens GN; Beerlage HP; Arends AJ; Debruyne FM
    Br J Urol; 1998 Jan; 81(1):31-5. PubMed ID: 9467473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of the efficacy and morbidity of flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower pole stones compared with other renal locations.
    Jacquemet B; Martin L; Pastori J; Bailly V; Guichard G; Bernardini S; Chabannes E; Bittard H; Kleinclauss F
    J Endourol; 2014 Oct; 28(10):1183-7. PubMed ID: 24811281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 37.