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 *

160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33691826)

  • 1. Success rate of type 1 tympanoplasty: a comparative study.
    Odat H; Alali M; Kanaan Y; Al-Qudah M
    J Laryngol Otol; 2021 Apr; 135(4):315-319. PubMed ID: 33691826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cartilage rim augmented fascia tympanoplasty: a more effective composite graft model than temporalis fascia tympanoplasty.
    Kolethekkat AA; Al Abri R; Al Zaabi K; Al Marhoobi N; Jose S; Pillai S; Mathew J
    J Laryngol Otol; 2018 Jun; 132(6):497-504. PubMed ID: 29888699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The button graft technique for perforations affecting less than 25% of the tympanic membrane: a non-randomised comparison of a new modification to cartilage tympanoplasty with underlay and overlay grafts.
    Abdelghany AM
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2013 Jun; 38(3):208-16. PubMed ID: 23745532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with double layer graft (modified sandwich fascia) technique and single layer graft (underlay fascia and underlay cartilage) technique.
    Nemade SV; Shinde KJ; Sampate PB
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2018 Jun; 45(3):440-446. PubMed ID: 28855058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of a microsliced modified chondroperichondrium shield graft and a temporalis fascia graft in primary type I tympanoplasty: A prospective randomized controlled trial.
    Bhattacharya SN; Pal S; Saha S; Gure PK; Roy A
    Ear Nose Throat J; 2016 Jul; 95(7):274-83. PubMed ID: 27434476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of subcutaneous soft tissue versus temporalis fascia as a tympanoplasty graft material: a retrospective cohort study.
    Faramarzi M; Faramarzi A; Roosta S; Abbasi N; Monabati A
    J Laryngol Otol; 2024 Feb; 138(2):153-161. PubMed ID: 37218630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Audiological and graft take results of cartilage reinforcement tympanoplasty (a new technique) versus fascia.
    Tek A; Karaman M; Uslu C; Habeşoğlu T; Kılıçarslan Y; Durmuş R; Esen S; Egeli E
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2012 Apr; 269(4):1117-26. PubMed ID: 21968630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of temporalis fascia muscle and full-thickness cartilage grafts in type 1 pediatric tympanoplasties.
    Yegin Y; Çelik M; Koç AK; Küfeciler L; Elbistanlı MS; Kayhan FT
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2016; 82(6):695-701. PubMed ID: 27068884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Functional results of temporalis fascia versus cartilage tympanoplasty in patients with bilateral chronic otitis media.
    Onal K; Arslanoglu S; Songu M; Demiray U; Demirpehlivan IA
    J Laryngol Otol; 2012 Jan; 126(1):22-5. PubMed ID: 22032518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Intraoperative tragal and conchal cartilage thickness: Comparative study for cartilage tympanoplasty.
    Rana AK; Sharma R; Sharma VK; Mehrotra A; Upadhyay D
    Am J Otolaryngol; 2020; 41(6):102690. PubMed ID: 32866848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison between clinical and audiological results of tympanoplasty with modified sandwich technique and underlay technique.
    Nemade SV; Shinde KJ; Naik CS; Qadri H
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2018; 84(3):318-323. PubMed ID: 28476655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative study of sliced tragal cartilage and temporalis fascia in type I tympanoplasty.
    Khan MM; Parab SR
    J Laryngol Otol; 2015 Jan; 129(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 25602596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Endaural Over-Underlay Cartilage Tympanoplasty for Repair of Dry Subtotal Perforations.
    Çetin YS; Erdem MZ
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2021 Dec; 130(12):1345-1350. PubMed ID: 33825491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Cartilage island versus temporalis fascia in high-risk tympanic perforation].
    Durán-Padilla CL; Martínez-Chávez J; Amador-Licona N; Pereyra-Nobara TA
    Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc; 2017; 55 Suppl 1():S58-S63. PubMed ID: 28212476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Island cartilage vs temporalis fascia in type 1 tympanoplasty: A prospective study.
    Jain A; Samdani S; Sharma MP; Meena V
    Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp (Engl Ed); 2018; 69(6):311-317. PubMed ID: 29576202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Inlay butterfly cartilage tympanoplasty in children.
    Couloigner V; Baculard F; El Bakkouri W; Viala P; François M; Narcy P; Van Den Abbeele T
    Otol Neurotol; 2005 Mar; 26(2):247-51. PubMed ID: 15793413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The wheel-shaped composite cartilage graft (WsCCG) and temporalis fascia for type 1 tympanoplasty: a prospective, randomized study.
    Ciğer E; Balcı MK; İşlek A; Önal K
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Dec; 275(12):2975-2981. PubMed ID: 30317384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Tympanoplasty: does dry or wet temporalis fascia graft matter?
    Singh GB; Kumar D; Aggarwal K; Garg S; Arora R; Kumar S
    J Laryngol Otol; 2016 Aug; 130(8):700-5. PubMed ID: 27459498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Which graft should be used for the pediatric transcanal endoscopic type 1 tympanoplasty? A comparative clinical study.
    Sen A; Özdamar K
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2019 Jun; 121():76-80. PubMed ID: 30877979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of cartilage graft and fascia in type 1 tympanoplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Yang T; Wu X; Peng X; Zhang Y; Xie S; Sun H
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2016 Nov; 136(11):1085-1090. PubMed ID: 27310768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.