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 *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39122363)

  • 1. Environmental impact of single-use versus reusable gastroscopes.
    Pioche M; Pohl H; Cunha Neves JA; Laporte A; Mochet M; Rivory J; Grau R; Jacques J; Grinberg D; Boube M; Baddeley R; Cottinet PJ; Schaefer M; Rodríguez de Santiago E; Berger A;
    Gut; 2024 Oct; 73(11):1816-1822. PubMed ID: 39122363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Does reusable mean green? Comparison of the environmental impact of reusable operating room bed covers and lift sheets versus single-use.
    Chang JH; Woo KP; Silva de Souza Lima Cano N; Bilec MM; Camhi M; Melnyk AI; Gross A; Walsh RM; Asfaw SH; Gordon IO; Miller BT
    Surgeon; 2024 Aug; 22(4):236-241. PubMed ID: 38862376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Environmental Impact of Flexible Cystoscopy: A Comparative Analysis Between Carbon Footprint of Isiris
    Jahrreiss V; Sarrot P; Davis NF; Somani B
    J Endourol; 2024 Apr; 38(4):386-394. PubMed ID: 38185843
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Carbon Footprint in Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Comparative Study on the Environmental Impact of Reusable and Single-Use Ureteroscopes.
    Davis NF; McGrath S; Quinlan M; Jack G; Lawrentschuk N; Bolton DM
    J Endourol; 2018 Mar; 32(3):214-217. PubMed ID: 29373918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Environmental impact of single-use and reusable flexible cystoscopes.
    Kemble JP; Winoker JS; Patel SH; Su ZT; Matlaga BR; Potretzke AM; Koo K
    BJU Int; 2023 May; 131(5):617-622. PubMed ID: 36515438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable and Disposable Cystoscopes: A Path to Greener Urological Procedures.
    Baboudjian M; Pradere B; Martin N; Gondran-Tellier B; Angerri O; Boucheron T; Bastide C; Emiliani E; Misrai V; Breda A; Lechevallier E
    Eur Urol Focus; 2023 Jul; 9(4):681-687. PubMed ID: 36543725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Life Cycle Assessment and Costing Methods for Device Procurement: Comparing Reusable and Single-Use Disposable Laryngoscopes.
    Sherman JD; Raibley LA; Eckelman MJ
    Anesth Analg; 2018 Aug; 127(2):434-443. PubMed ID: 29324492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Developing a carbon footprint model and environmental impact analysis of municipal solid waste transportation: A case study of Tehran, Iran.
    Rouhi K; Shafiepour Motlagh M; Dalir F
    J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2023 Dec; 73(12):890-901. PubMed ID: 37843987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cost and Environmental Impact of Disposable Flexible Cystoscopes Compared to Reusable Devices.
    Boucheron T; Lechevallier E; Gondran-Tellier B; Michel F; Bastide C; Martin N; Baboudjian M
    J Endourol; 2022 Oct; 36(10):1317-1321. PubMed ID: 35703325
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Disposable versus reusable gastroscopes: a prospective randomized noninferiority trial.
    Luo X; Ji M; Zhang S; Chen X; Zong Y; Zhang X; Hu H; Hao X; Shao L; Sun C; Shi H; Wang J; Wang B; Li P
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2022 Aug; 96(2):250-261. PubMed ID: 35381230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing the environmental impact of reusable and disposable dental examination kits: a life cycle assessment approach.
    Byrne D; Saget S; Davidson A; Haneef H; Abdeldaim T; Almudahkah A; Basquille N; Bergin AM; Prida J; Lyne A; Duane B
    Br Dent J; 2022 Aug; 233(4):317-325. PubMed ID: 36028697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Does Reusable Instrumentation for Four-Anchor Rotator Cuff Repair Offer Decreased Waste Disposal Costs and Lower Waste-Related Carbon Emissions?
    Pearson Z; Hung V; Agarwal A; Stehlik K; Harris A; Ahiarakwe U; Best MJ
    J Am Acad Orthop Surg; 2024 Aug; 32(15):705-711. PubMed ID: 38861714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Carbon Footprint of Single-Use Flexible Cystoscopes Compared with Reusable Cystoscopes.
    Hogan D; Rauf H; Kinnear N; Hennessey DB
    J Endourol; 2022 Nov; 36(11):1460-1464. PubMed ID: 35607858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable and Disposable Surgical Caps.
    Donahue LM; Petit HJ; Thiel CL; Sullivan GA; Gulack BC; Shah AN
    J Surg Res; 2024 Jul; 299():112-119. PubMed ID: 38749314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparative carbon footprint analysis of disposable and reusable vaginal specula.
    Donahue LM; Hilton S; Bell SG; Williams BC; Keoleian GA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Aug; 223(2):225.e1-225.e7. PubMed ID: 32067971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps. A prospective cost analysis in the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit of the Dijon University Hospital].
    Lejeune C; Prost P; Michiels C; Roullaud-Guenfoudi MP; Phelip JM; Martin L; Rassiat E; Faivre J
    Gastroenterol Clin Biol; 2001; 25(6-7):669-73. PubMed ID: 11673734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Disposable-sheath, flexible gastroscope system versus standard gastroscopes: a prospective, randomized trial.
    Mayinger B; Strenkert M; Hochberger J; Martus P; Kunz B; Hahn EG
    Gastrointest Endosc; 1999 Oct; 50(4):461-7. PubMed ID: 10502164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A systematic review comparing the safety, cost and carbon footprint of disposable and reusable laparoscopic devices.
    Chauvet P; Enguix A; Sautou V; Slim K
    J Visc Surg; 2024 Apr; 161(2S):25-31. PubMed ID: 38272757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Financial and environmental costs of reusable and single-use anaesthetic equipment.
    McGain F; Story D; Lim T; McAlister S
    Br J Anaesth; 2017 Jun; 118(6):862-869. PubMed ID: 28505289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The carbon footprint of an Australian satellite haemodialysis unit.
    Lim AE; Perkins A; Agar JW
    Aust Health Rev; 2013 Jun; 37(3):369-74. PubMed ID: 23731962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.