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.
130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29885336)
1. Alternative approaches to polyp extraction in colonoscopy: a proof of principle study. Barge W; Kumar D; Giusto D; Kramer J; Behara R; Jakate S; Bishehsari F; Losurdo J; Lee S; Singh S; Melson J Gastrointest Endosc; 2018 Sep; 88(3):536-541. PubMed ID: 29885336 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effectiveness of suction valve button removal in retrieving resected colon polyps for better histological assessment: Propensity score matching analysis. Kishida Y; Hotta K; Imai K; Ito S; Yabuuchi Y; Yoshida M; Kawata N; Kakushima N; Takizawa K; Ishiwatari H; Matsubayashi H; Ono H Dig Endosc; 2021 Mar; 33(3):433-440. PubMed ID: 32573839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A novel polyp retrieval bag reduces the polyp fragmentation rate in colon polypectomy: a single-blind randomized controlled study. Chu J; Ma C; Min M; Bi Q; Shen W; Zhang X; Zhang H; Li A; Liu Y; Lu Z Int J Colorectal Dis; 2024 Jul; 39(1):118. PubMed ID: 39048748 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Retrieval of colorectal polyps following snare polypectomy: Experience of the multiple-suction technique in 602 cases. Ye F; Feng Y; Lin J Int J Colorectal Dis; 2008 Apr; 23(4):431-6. PubMed ID: 18185937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Water-slider method reduced colonic polyp fragmentation compared with conventional suction retrieval: A prospective randomized controlled study. Shimayoshi A; Bessho H; Kawamoto Y; Yamamoto S; Sung J; Morita Y; Wakamatsu S; Horie M; Kai Y; Takeda R; Iwahashi K; Shibukawa N; Miyazaki M; Egawa S; Oshita M Dig Liver Dis; 2021 Jun; 53(6):717-721. PubMed ID: 33478875 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A prospective randomized comparative study of cold forceps polypectomy by using narrow-band imaging endoscopy versus cold snare polypectomy in patients with diminutive colorectal polyps. Park SK; Ko BM; Han JP; Hong SJ; Lee MS Gastrointest Endosc; 2016 Mar; 83(3):527-32.e1. PubMed ID: 26358331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Polyp retrieval after colonoscopic polypectomy: use of the Roth Retrieval Net. Miller K; Waye JD Gastrointest Endosc; 2001 Oct; 54(4):505-7. PubMed ID: 11577319 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Factors associated with failed polyp retrieval at screening colonoscopy. Komeda Y; Suzuki N; Sarah M; Thomas-Gibson S; Vance M; Fraser C; Patel K; Saunders BP Gastrointest Endosc; 2013 Mar; 77(3):395-400. PubMed ID: 23211749 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cold snare polypectomy: does snare type influence outcomes? Din S; Ball AJ; Riley SA; Kitsanta P; Johal S Dig Endosc; 2015 Jul; 27(5):603-8. PubMed ID: 25639685 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Can endoscopic submucosal dissection technique be an alternative treatment option for a difficult giant (≥ 30 mm) pedunculated colorectal polyp? Choi YS; Lee JB; Lee EJ; Lee SH; Suh JP; Lee DH; Kim DS; Youk EG Dis Colon Rectum; 2013 May; 56(5):660-6. PubMed ID: 23575407 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality of polyp resection during colonoscopy: are we achieving polyp clearance? Liu S; Ho SB; Krinsky ML Dig Dis Sci; 2012 Jul; 57(7):1786-91. PubMed ID: 22461018 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy versus a suction pseudopolyp technique. Din S; Ball AJ; Riley SA; Kitsanta P; Johal S Endoscopy; 2015 Nov; 47(11):1005-10. PubMed ID: 26165735 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prospective randomized comparison of cold snare polypectomy and conventional polypectomy for small colorectal polyps. Ichise Y; Horiuchi A; Nakayama Y; Tanaka N Digestion; 2011; 84(1):78-81. PubMed ID: 21494037 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cold snare polypectomy vs. Cold forceps polypectomy using double-biopsy technique for removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: a prospective randomized study. Lee CK; Shim JJ; Jang JY Am J Gastroenterol; 2013 Oct; 108(10):1593-600. PubMed ID: 24042189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Histological quality of polyps resected using the cold versus hot biopsy technique. Mönkemüller KE; Fry LC; Jones BH; Wells C; Mikolaenko I; Eloubeidi M Endoscopy; 2004 May; 36(5):432-6. PubMed ID: 15100953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Removal of small colorectal polyps in anticoagulated patients: a prospective randomized comparison of cold snare and conventional polypectomy. Horiuchi A; Nakayama Y; Kajiyama M; Tanaka N; Sano K; Graham DY Gastrointest Endosc; 2014 Mar; 79(3):417-23. PubMed ID: 24125514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Histopathologic features and fragmentation of polyps with cold snare defect protrusions. Ishii T; Harada T; Tanuma T; Yamazaki H; Tachibana Y; Aoki H; Shinohara T; Katanuma A Gastrointest Endosc; 2021 Apr; 93(4):952-959. PubMed ID: 32730821 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Removal of diminutive colorectal polyps: A prospective randomized clinical trial between cold snare polypectomy and hot forceps biopsy. Komeda Y; Kashida H; Sakurai T; Tribonias G; Okamoto K; Kono M; Yamada M; Adachi T; Mine H; Nagai T; Asakuma Y; Hagiwara S; Matsui S; Watanabe T; Kitano M; Chikugo T; Chiba Y; Kudo M World J Gastroenterol; 2017 Jan; 23(2):328-335. PubMed ID: 28127206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Scope or scalpel? A matched study of the treatment of large colorectal polyps. Church J; Erkan A ANZ J Surg; 2018 Mar; 88(3):177-181. PubMed ID: 27491016 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]