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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27768966)

  • 1. A multicenter study assessing uterine cavity width in over 400 nulliparous women seeking IUD insertion using 2D and 3D sonography.
    Wildemeersch D; Hasskamp T; Nolte K; Jandi S; Pett A; Linden S; van Santen M; Julen O
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Nov; 206():232-238. PubMed ID: 27768966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Menstrual characteristics and ultrasonographic uterine cavity measurements predict bleeding and pain in nulligravid women using intrauterine contraception.
    Kaislasuo J; Heikinheimo O; Lähteenmäki P; Suhonen S
    Hum Reprod; 2015 Jul; 30(7):1580-8. PubMed ID: 25990577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The width of the uterine cavity is narrower in patients with an embedded intrauterine device (IUD) compared to a normally positioned IUD.
    Shipp TD; Bromley B; Benacerraf BR
    J Ultrasound Med; 2010 Oct; 29(10):1453-6. PubMed ID: 20876899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. In vivo measurements of uterine cavities in 795 women of fertile age.
    Kurz KH; Tadesse E; Haspels AA
    Contraception; 1984 Jun; 29(6):495-510. PubMed ID: 6467940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A critical ('stress') evaluation of the combined ML Copper 250-short IUD in nulliparous women.
    Goldstuck ND
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1981 Oct; 2(4):287-93. PubMed ID: 12336989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Uterine dimensions and intrauterine device malposition: can ultrasound predict displacement or expulsion before it happens?
    Çintesun FNİ; Çintesun E; Esenkaya Ü; Günenc O
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2020 Nov; 302(5):1181-1187. PubMed ID: 32748051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Expulsion and continuation rates after postabortion insertion of framed IUDs versus frameless IUDs - review of the literature.
    Wildemeersch D; Goldstuck ND
    Open Access J Contracept; 2015; 6():87-94. PubMed ID: 29386926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Width of the normal uterine cavity in premenopausal women and effect of parity.
    Benacerraf BR; Shipp TD; Lyons JG; Bromley B
    Obstet Gynecol; 2010 Aug; 116(2 Pt 1):305-310. PubMed ID: 20664389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Avoidance of the dimensional incompatibility as the main reason for side effects in intrauterine contraception.
    Kurz KH
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1981 Jan; 2(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 12278585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Does the type of intrauterine device affect conspicuity on 2D and 3D ultrasound?
    Moschos E; Twickler DM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1439-43. PubMed ID: 21606311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Use of 3-dimensional ultrasound for assessment of intrauterine device position].
    Hösli I; Holzgreve W; Tercanli S
    Ultraschall Med; 2001 Apr; 22(2):75-80. PubMed ID: 11398504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Precision intrauterine contraception may significantly increase continuation of use: a review of long-term clinical experience with frameless copper-releasing intrauterine contraception devices.
    Wildemeersch D; Pett A; Jandi S; Hasskamp T; Rowe P; Vrijens M
    Int J Womens Health; 2013; 5():215-25. PubMed ID: 23658502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Intrauterine contraception in nulliparous women].
    Prilepskaia VN; Mezhevitinova EA
    Akush Ginekol (Mosk); 1991 Apr; (4):5-8. PubMed ID: 1862876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Tailoring of Fincoid-350 insertions--experience with Hasson's Wing Sound 1 Cavimeter.
    Kaivola S
    Adv Contracept; 1986 Jun; 2(2):177-83. PubMed ID: 3776744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Intrauterine device quo vadis? Why intrauterine device use should be revisited particularly in nulliparous women?
    Wildemeersch D; Goldstuck N; Hasskamp T; Jandi S; Pett A
    Open Access J Contracept; 2015; 6():1-12. PubMed ID: 29386919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Three-dimensional ultrasound detection of abnormally located intrauterine contraceptive devices which are a source of pelvic pain and abnormal bleeding.
    Benacerraf BR; Shipp TD; Bromley B
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Jul; 34(1):110-5. PubMed ID: 19565532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Length of the endometrial cavity as measured by uterine sounding and ultrasonography in women of different parities.
    Canteiro R; Bahamondes MV; dos Santos Fernandes A; Espejo-Arce X; Marchi NM; Bahamondes L
    Contraception; 2010 Jun; 81(6):515-9. PubMed ID: 20472119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessment of uterine cavity size and shape: a systematic review addressing relevance to intrauterine procedures and events.
    Goldstuck N
    Afr J Reprod Health; 2012 Sep; 16(3):130-9. PubMed ID: 23437507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. T-shaped IUDs accommodate in their position during the first 3 months after insertion.
    Faúndes D; Perdigão A; Faúndes A; Bahamondes L; Petta CA
    Contraception; 2000 Oct; 62(4):165-8. PubMed ID: 11137069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Safe and cost-effective ultrasound guided removal of retained intrauterine device: our experience.
    Verma U; Astudillo-Dávalos FE; Gerkowicz SA
    Contraception; 2015 Jul; 92(1):77-80. PubMed ID: 25708503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.