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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3727690)

  • 1. Comparative in vitro evaluation of porcine and pericardial bioprostheses.
    Reul H; Giersiepen M; Schindehütte H; Effert S; Rau G
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():223-31. PubMed ID: 3727690
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of pressure- and volume-loss of technical and biological heart valve prostheses.
    Köhler J
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():272-6. PubMed ID: 3727699
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Computer modelling of bioprosthetic heart valves.
    Christie GW
    Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 1992; 6 Suppl 1():S95-100; discussion S101. PubMed ID: 1389288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The first step to understanding valve failure: an overview of pathology.
    Schoen FJ
    Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 1992; 6 Suppl 1():S50-3. PubMed ID: 1389279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Does pericardial thickness guarantee a homogeneous bioprosthetic product? Evaluation of modification in the physical characteristics of bovine pericardium exposed to pressure stress test.
    Mikus PM; Arpesella G; Gargiulo G; Cirillo M; Marrozzini C; Pierangeli V; Pierangeli A
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():237-40. PubMed ID: 3727692
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Haemodynamic evaluation of the Hancock bovine pericardial heart valve.
    Weingartner J; Kreuzer E; Weinhold C; Reichart B; Peters D; Erdmann E
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():241-4. PubMed ID: 3727694
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In vitro pulsatile flow evaluation of a stentless porcine aortic bioprosthesis.
    Sung HW; Le TN; Kingsbury CJ; Quintero LJ; Myers KE; Quijano RC
    ASAIO J; 1995; 41(1):89-94. PubMed ID: 7727828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bioprostheses are superior to mechanical prostheses.
    Jamieson WR
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():258-71. PubMed ID: 3727698
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative assessment of bioprosthesis durability in the aortic position.
    Grunkemeier GL; Bodnar E
    J Heart Valve Dis; 1995 Jan; 4(1):49-55. PubMed ID: 7742990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Kangaroo xenobioprostheses--an advantage in heart valve replacement.
    Weinhold C; Weingartner J; Adt M; Peters D; Reichart B; Kreuzer E; Gokel JM; Hammer C
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():251-3. PubMed ID: 3727696
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A new porcine bioprosthesis: in vitro and in vivo evaluation.
    Reece IJ; Anderson JD; Wain WH; Carr K; Toner PG; Tindale W; Black MM; Wheatley DJ
    Life Support Syst; 1985; 3(3):207-27. PubMed ID: 4046637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Hydrodynamic comparison of biological prostheses during progressive valve calcification in a simulated exercise situation. An in vitro study.
    Bakhtiary F; Dzemali O; Steinseiffer U; Schmitz C; Glasmacher B; Moritz A; Kleine P
    Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2008 Nov; 34(5):960-3. PubMed ID: 18774723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Carpentier pericardial valve.
    Cosgrove DM
    Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1996 Jul; 8(3):269-75. PubMed ID: 8843518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Haemodynamics and durability of mitral bioprostheses--an in vitro study.
    Gabbay S; Bortolotti U; Wasserman F; Factor SM
    Eur Heart J; 1984 Oct; 5 Suppl D():65-71. PubMed ID: 6240399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation in vitro of prosthetic heart valves: pulsatile flow through a compliant aorta.
    Tindale WB; Trowbridge EA
    Life Support Syst; 1983; 1(3):173-88. PubMed ID: 6679015
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Are bioprostheses superior to mechanical valves?
    Schön HR; Unger B; Weingartner F; Sebening H; Blömer H
    Z Kardiol; 1986; 75 Suppl 2():286-8. PubMed ID: 3727703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Small aortic annulus: the hydrodynamic performances of 5 commercially available tissue valves.
    Gerosa G; Tarzia V; Rizzoli G; Bottio T
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2006 May; 131(5):1058-64. PubMed ID: 16678590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanical factors influencing the durability of heart valve pericardial bioprostheses.
    Gabbay S; Bortolotti U; Josif M
    ASAIO Trans; 1986; 32(1):282-7. PubMed ID: 3778723
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Carotid pulse curve in patients with prosthetic aortic heart valves (author's transl)].
    Schwab W; Raas E
    Wien Med Wochenschr; 1980 Jul; 130(13-14):475-8. PubMed ID: 7424036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Erroneous sizing of valve bioprostheses?
    Bonchek LI
    J Card Surg; 1992 Jun; 7(2):191-2. PubMed ID: 1606371
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.