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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29105214)

  • 1. Re: Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. A. Di Spiezio Sardo, G. Saccone, R. McCurdy, E. Bujold, G. Bifulco and V. Berghella. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50: 578-583.
    Rozenberg P
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 50(5):557-558. PubMed ID: 29105214
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Di Spiezio Sardo A; Saccone G; McCurdy R; Bujold E; Bifulco G; Berghella V
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 50(5):578-583. PubMed ID: 28070914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Re: Cervical length screening for prevention of preterm birth in singleton pregnancy with threatened preterm labor: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using individual patient-level data. V. Berghella, M. Palacio, A. Ness, Z. Alfirevic, K. H. Nicolaides and G. Saccone. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49: 322-329.
    van Baaren GJ; Mol BW
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Mar; 49(3):301-302. PubMed ID: 28266156
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and metaanalysis.
    Roberge S; Demers S; Berghella V; Chaillet N; Moore L; Bujold E
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Nov; 211(5):453-60. PubMed ID: 24912096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Single versus double-layer uterine closure at cesarean: impact on lower uterine segment thickness at next pregnancy.
    Vachon-Marceau C; Demers S; Bujold E; Roberge S; Gauthier RJ; Pasquier JC; Girard M; Chaillet N; Boulvain M; Jastrow N
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jul; 217(1):65.e1-65.e5. PubMed ID: 28263751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Impact of uterine closure on residual myometrial thickness after cesarean: a randomized controlled trial.
    Roberge S; Demers S; Girard M; Vikhareva O; Markey S; Chaillet N; Moore L; Paris G; Bujold E
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Apr; 214(4):507.e1-507.e6. PubMed ID: 26522861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ultrasound evaluation of Cesarean scar after single- and double-layer uterotomy closure: a cohort study.
    Glavind J; Madsen LD; Uldbjerg N; Dueholm M
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2013 Aug; 42(2):207-12. PubMed ID: 23288683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Hydrosonographic assessment of the effects of 2 different suturing techniques on healing of the uterine scar after cesarean delivery.
    Sevket O; Ates S; Molla T; Ozkal F; Uysal O; Dansuk R
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2014 Jun; 125(3):219-22. PubMed ID: 24680843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Re: Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure.
    Huirne JAF; Stegwee SI; van der Voet LF; de Groot CJM; Hehenkamp WJK; Brölmann HAM
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 50(5):664-666. PubMed ID: 29105218
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Re: Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure.
    Demers S; Roberge S
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 50(5):667. PubMed ID: 29105219
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial.
    Bamberg C; Hinkson L; Dudenhausen JW; Bujak V; Kalache KD; Henrich W
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2017 Dec; 96(12):1484-1489. PubMed ID: 28832909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Ultrasound evaluation of the uterine scar after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial of one- and two-layer closure.
    Hamar BD; Saber SB; Cackovic M; Magloire LK; Pettker CM; Abdel-Razeq SS; Rosenberg VA; Buhimschi IA; Buhimschi CS
    Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Oct; 110(4):808-13. PubMed ID: 17906013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cesarean Scar Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.
    Gonzalez N; Tulandi T
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(5):731-738. PubMed ID: 28268103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Ultrasonographic analysis of cesarean scars features in nonpregnant uterus].
    Zimmer M; Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Tomiałowicz M; Michniewicz J; Wiatrowski A; Mikołajczyk K
    Ginekol Pol; 2007 Nov; 78(11):842-6. PubMed ID: 18306913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Morphology of the cesarean section scar in the non-pregnant uterus after one elective cesarean section.
    Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Rosner-Tenerowicz A; Zimmer M
    Ginekol Pol; 2017; 88(4):174-179. PubMed ID: 28509317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Standardized ultrasonographic approach for the assessment of risk factors of incomplete healing of the cesarean section scar in the uterus.
    Pomorski M; Fuchs T; Rosner-Tenerowicz A; Zimmer M
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Oct; 205():141-5. PubMed ID: 27591715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Purse-string double-layer closure: a novel technique for repairing the uterine incision during cesarean section.
    Turan C; Büyükbayrak EE; Yilmaz AO; Karsidag YK; Pirimoglu M
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2015 Apr; 41(4):565-74. PubMed ID: 25370526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comment on "Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial".
    Scioscia M; Iannone P; Morano D; Pontrelli G; Greco P
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2018 May; 97(5):629. PubMed ID: 29220081
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Emerging Manifestations of Cesarean Scar Defect in Reproductive-aged Women.
    Tulandi T; Cohen A
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(6):893-902. PubMed ID: 27393285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Re: Validation of prediction model for successful vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery based on sonographic assessment of hysterotomy scar. A. Baranov, K. Å. Salvesen and O. Vikhareva. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 51: 189-193.
    Timmerman D
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Feb; 51(2):167. PubMed ID: 29417680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.