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: 6740420)

  • 1. [Uterine measurements in the fitting of intrauterine devices].
    Theron F; Wessels PH
    S Afr Med J; 1984 Jun; 65(26):1054-6. PubMed ID: 6740420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Tailoring of Fincoid-350 insertions--experience with Hasson's Wing Sound 1 Cavimeter.
    Kaivola S
    Adv Contracept; 1986 Jun; 2(2):177-83. PubMed ID: 3776744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Ultra sonography for the localization of intra-uterine contraceptive devices (i.u.d.'s) (author's transl)].
    Meyenburg M
    Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd; 1978 Nov; 38(11):950-7. PubMed ID: 710881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Measurement of the endometrial cavity length using Wing Sound I.
    de Castro A; Yebra C; Aznar F; Pinilla E; Nieto A; Valenzuela P; Lopez-Salva A
    Adv Contracept; 1987 Jun; 3(2):133-7. PubMed ID: 3630822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. In vivo measurements of uterine cavities in 795 women of fertile age.
    Kurz KH; Tadesse E; Haspels AA
    Contraception; 1984 Jun; 29(6):495-510. PubMed ID: 6467940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Length of the endometrial cavity as measured by uterine sounding and ultrasonography in women of different parities.
    Canteiro R; Bahamondes MV; dos Santos Fernandes A; Espejo-Arce X; Marchi NM; Bahamondes L
    Contraception; 2010 Jun; 81(6):515-9. PubMed ID: 20472119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Uterine metrology devices for IUD selection.
    Program for the Introduction and Adaptation of Contraceptive Technology PIACT
    PIACT Prod News; 1981 Nov; 3(2):1-4. PubMed ID: 12278959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. New probe for accurate IUD fit slated for market this fall.
    Contracept Technol Update; 1981 Oct; 2(10):134-6. PubMed ID: 12263465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Uterine geometry and IUCD design.
    Hasson HM
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1982 Sep; 89(Suppl 4):1-10. PubMed ID: 7150525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Relationship between the size and shape of intrauterine device and the uterine cavity as observed by superimposition hysterography].
    Havránek F; Valenta M; Dvorák K
    Cesk Gynekol; 1967 Apr; 32(3):232-4. PubMed ID: 5626429
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical significance of correlation between size of uterine cavity and IUCD. A study by planimeter-hysterogram technique.
    Tejuja S; Malkani PK
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1969 Oct; 105(4):620-7. PubMed ID: 5824884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Application of intrauterine devices preceded by measurement of the endometrial cavity using a Hollister sound].
    Reynoso Ron L; Lozano Balderas M; Lara Ricalde R; Flores Velez A; Aznar Ramos R
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 1982 Feb; 50(298):21-4. PubMed ID: 7129181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Diagnostic ultrasound in the management of patients using intrauterine contraceptive devices.
    Wittmann BK; Chow TT
    Br J Obstet Gynaecol; 1976 Oct; 83(10):802-8. PubMed ID: 990221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical performance of intrauterine devices in nulligravidae: is the length of the endometrial cavity of significance?
    Petersen KR; Brooks L; Jacobsen N; Skoby SO
    Acta Eur Fertil; 1991; 22(4):225-8. PubMed ID: 1844327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Uterine geometry by Wing Sound and hysterography versus direct measurements.
    Ismail AA; Anwar MY; Keshk SM; Azazy SM; Gaweesh S; Toppozada MK
    Adv Contracept; 1987 Sep; 3(3):237-43. PubMed ID: 3673699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The significance of differential uterine measurements in-vivo.
    Gunaratne M
    Ceylon Med J; 1977 Mar; 22(1):11-23. PubMed ID: 637929
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessment of uterine shape by geometric means.
    Hasson HM; Dershin H
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1981 Jan; 2(1):59-75. PubMed ID: 12278590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparative effects of silk and copper intra-uterine contraceptive devices on the uterine horns of rat.
    Gupta DN; Malaviya B; Karkun JN
    Indian J Med Res; 1974 Oct; 62(10):1592-5. PubMed ID: 4455618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of copper-7 intrauterine device in Malaysian women.
    Sivanesaratnam V; Puvan IS; Sinnathuray TA
    Med J Aust; 1975 Aug; 2(8):298-301. PubMed ID: 1165736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The size and shape of the uterine cavity determined by hysterography with an intrauterine contraceptive device as a marker.
    Burnhill MS; Birnberg CH
    Int J Fertil; 1966; 11(2):187-93. PubMed ID: 5957246
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.