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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30138100)

  • 1. Hybrid guidewires: Analysis and comparison of the mechanical properties and safety profiles.
    Hinck BD; Emmott AS; Omar M; Tarplin S; Chew BH; Monga M
    Can Urol Assoc J; 2019 Feb; 13(2):59-63. PubMed ID: 30138100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Systematic evaluation of hybrid guidewires: shaft stiffness, lubricity, and tip configuration.
    Sarkissian C; Korman E; Hendlin K; Monga M
    Urology; 2012 Mar; 79(3):513-7. PubMed ID: 22173176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Hydrophilic guidewires: evaluation and comparison of their properties and safety.
    Torricelli FC; De S; Sarkissian C; Monga M
    Urology; 2013 Nov; 82(5):1182-6. PubMed ID: 23992968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of guide wires in urology. Which, when and why?
    Clayman M; Uribe CA; Eichel L; Gordon Z; McDougall EM; Clayman RV
    J Urol; 2004 Jun; 171(6 Pt 1):2146-50. PubMed ID: 15126774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Stiff Guidewires in Endourology: What Is Stiffness?
    Kolvatzis M; Sierra A; Corrales M; Traxer O
    J Endourol; 2022 Nov; 36(11):1475-1482. PubMed ID: 35801659
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparative experimental evaluation of guidewire use in urology.
    Liguori G; Antoniolli F; Trombetta C; Biasotto M; Amodeo A; Pomara G; Bucci S; Belgrano E
    Urology; 2008 Aug; 72(2):286-9; discussion 289-90. PubMed ID: 18407332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Structural factors influencing the clinical performance of 0.025-inch guidewires for pancreatobiliary endoscopy: An experimental study.
    Koga T; Tsuchiya N; Ishida Y; Kitaguchi T; Matsumoto K; Fukuyama M; Kojima S; Kojima N; Hirai F
    Endosc Int Open; 2024 May; 12(5):E666-E675. PubMed ID: 38707594
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. New ureteral access sheaths: a double standard.
    De S; Sarkissian C; Torricelli FC; Brown R; Monga M
    Urology; 2015 Apr; 85(4):757-63. PubMed ID: 25661780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Ureteral access sheaths: a comprehensive comparison of physical and mechanical properties.
    Patel N; Monga M
    Int Braz J Urol; 2018; 44(3):524-535. PubMed ID: 29493185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Guidewire type and prior use affects ureteral stent insertion force.
    Ewald J; Hodgson H; Thomas J; Khater N; Keheila M; Alsyouf M; Arenas JL; Hajiha M; Baldwin DD
    Can J Urol; 2020 Apr; 27(2):10174-10180. PubMed ID: 32333737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser and Guidewires: Is There a Durability Difference Among Guidewires Against Laser Energy? An In Vitro Experimental Study.
    Bagbanci S
    J Endourol; 2017 May; 31(5):528-532. PubMed ID: 28269994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What Guidewire Is the Best for Bypassing an Impacted Ureteral Stone?
    Amasyali AS; Groegler J; Hajiha M; Shah M; Alsyouf M; Stokes P; Belay R; Maldonado J; Baldwin DD
    J Endourol; 2020 May; 34(5):629-636. PubMed ID: 32070125
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Technical Reports of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Guidewires on the Basis of Physical Properties.
    Kwon CI; Koh DH; Song TJ; Park WS; Lee DH; Jeong S
    Clin Endosc; 2020 Jan; 53(1):65-72. PubMed ID: 31382731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of hydrophilic guidewires used in endovascular procedures.
    Niazi K; Farooqui F; Devireddy C; Robertson G; Shaw RE
    J Invasive Cardiol; 2009 Aug; 21(8):397-400. PubMed ID: 19652253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Glass-Fiber-based MR-safe Guidewire for MR Imaging-guided Endovascular Interventions: In Vitro and Preclinical in Vivo Feasibility Study.
    Massmann A; Buecker A; Schneider GK
    Radiology; 2017 Aug; 284(2):541-551. PubMed ID: 28301310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Tipless Nitinol Stone Baskets: Comparison of Penetration Force, Radial Dilation Force, Opening Dynamics, and Deflection.
    Patel N; Akhavein A; Hinck B; Jain R; Monga M
    Urology; 2017 May; 103():256-260. PubMed ID: 28104422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Endoscopic Valves and Irrigation Devices for Flexible Ureteroscopy: Is There a Difference?
    Tarplin S; Byrne M; Farrell N; Monga M; Sivalingam S
    J Endourol; 2015 Sep; 29(9):983-92. PubMed ID: 25793630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Experimental study of loop shape using 0.025-inch ERCP guidewires (with videos).
    Ogura T; Ueno S; Okuda A; Nishioka N; Yamada T; Yamada M; Ueshima K; Matsuno J; Yamamoto Y; Higuchi K
    Endosc Int Open; 2021 Mar; 9(3):E427-E437. PubMed ID: 33655046
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Physical properties of flexible ureteroscopes: implications for clinical practice.
    Monga M; Anderson KJ; Durfee W
    J Endourol; 2004 Jun; 18(5):462-5. PubMed ID: 15253821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Foley catheter characteristics: predicting problems.
    Hendlin K; Meyers J; Monga M
    J Endourol; 2009 Jan; 23(1):169-71. PubMed ID: 19118460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.