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 *

69 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7302778)

  • 1. The multiload intra-uterine contraceptive device. Comparison of 4 different models.
    Van Os WA; De Nooyer CC; Kleinhout J
    S Afr Med J; 1981 Dec; 60(24):938-40. PubMed ID: 7302778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of four different models of the Multiload copper IUD.
    Os WA; Thiery M; Van Der Pas H; Rhemrev PE; De Nooyer CC; Kleinhout J
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1981 Oct; 2(4):275-80. PubMed ID: 12336987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Randomized comparison of multiload standard and short devices.
    Kivijarvi A
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1983 Sep; 4(4):289-92. PubMed ID: 12265803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [The role of copper-releasing intrauterine device or levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on uterine bleeding and iron status (prospective study of 8 years)].
    Imperato F; Perniola G; Mossa B; Marziani R; Perniola F; Stragapede B; Napolitano C
    Minerva Ginecol; 2002 Jun; 54(3):271-8. PubMed ID: 12063443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Performances of copper T 380A and multiload copper 375/250 intrauterine contraceptive devices in a comparative clinical trial.
    Arowojolu AO; Otolorin EO; Ladipo OA
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 1995 Mar; 24(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 7495202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [A comparison between the Multiload Cu 250 and the Lippes loop intrauterine contraceptive devices].
    Theron F
    S Afr Med J; 1980 Jul; 58(2):64-5. PubMed ID: 7404184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Larger amounts of copper correspond to greater contraceptive effectiveness. Experiments with the ML Cu 375, the IUD with the highest copper content].
    Van Os WA
    Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet; 1985 Jul; 80(7):589-91. PubMed ID: 4035197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Postpartum insertion of the combined multiload copper intra-uterine device (M L Cu 250).
    Wathen NC; Sapire KE; Davey DA
    S Afr Med J; 1978 Sep; 54(12):473-6. PubMed ID: 734576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Preliminary report on the use of the combined multiload contraceptive intrauterine device (ML Cu-250).
    Sadovsky E; Yarkoni S
    Fertil Steril; 1978 Nov; 30(5):519-21. PubMed ID: 720641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Experience with the Copper-7 and Copper-T intrauterine devices at Siriraj Hospital in Bangkok, Thailand.
    Koetsawang S; Srisupandit S; Bhiraleus P; Rachawat D; Kiriwat O; Jirochkul V; Mitra M; Thomas M
    J Med Assoc Thai; 1982 Jan; 65(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 6153035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Insertion of intrauterine devices: a comparison of experience with Mirena and Multiload Cu 375 during post-marketing monitoring in New Zealand.
    Harrison-Woolrych M; Zhou L; Coulter D
    N Z Med J; 2003 Aug; 116(1179):U538. PubMed ID: 14513085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A critical ('stress') evaluation of the combined ML Copper 250-short IUD in nulliparous women.
    Goldstuck ND
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1981 Oct; 2(4):287-93. PubMed ID: 12336989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Expulsion of Nova-T380, Multiload 375, and Copper-T380A contraceptive devices inserted during cesarean delivery.
    Ragab A; Hamed HO; Alsammani MA; Shalaby H; Nabeil H; Barakat R; Fetih AN
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2015 Aug; 130(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 25975871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Interim insertion of the ML Cu 250 intrauterine contraceptive device.
    Vankets He Thiery M; Van Der Pas H; Delbeke L Van Os WA; Tauber PE; Dombrowicz N; Macdonald JS; Haspels AA; Drogenduk AC
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1980 Apr; 1(2):149-54. PubMed ID: 12336242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Comparative evaluation of M.L. Cu. 250].
    van Os WA; Haspels AA; Rhemrev PE; Loendersloot EW; Lo Sin Sjoe E; de Nooyer CC
    Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet; 1977 Dec; 72(12):829-32. PubMed ID: 607377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of combined multiload copper IUD (MLCu250 and MLCu375).
    Van Os WA; De Nooyer CC; Bakker S; Bomert L; Rhemrev PE; Loendersloot EW
    Int J Fertil; 1978; 23(2):152-5. PubMed ID: 30726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The acceptability of the Copper 7, Multiload 250 and Copper T 220C intrauterine devices.
    Hutapea H; Mccarthy T; Goh TH; Hanafiah MJ; Simadjuntak P; Lim LS; Karim SM; Ratnam SS; Yong YM; Sinnathuray TA
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1984 Jan; 5(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 12312739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Assessment of the performance of a copper intrauterine device: MLCu 375].
    Audebert A; Emperaire JC; Larue-charlus S
    Contracept Fertil Sex (Paris); 1985 Jan; 13(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 12266608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The multiload copper intra-uterine contraceptive device in a mixed urban and rural population: A 3-year clinical evaluation.
    Shlugman J
    S Afr Med J; 1979 Sep; 56(14):571-2. PubMed ID: 399091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Copper IUDs.
    Thiery M
    Contracept Deliv Syst; 1983 Jul; 4(3):175-85. PubMed ID: 12265360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.