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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7815632)

  • 1. Biocompatibility of various indwelling double-J stents.
    Cormio L; Talja M; Koivusalo A; Mäkisalo H; Wolff H; Ruutu M
    J Urol; 1995 Feb; 153(2):494-6. PubMed ID: 7815632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the use of a biodegradable ureteral stent after retrograde endopyelotomy in a porcine model.
    Olweny EO; Landman J; Andreoni C; Collyer W; Kerbl K; Onciu M; Välimaa T; Clayman RV
    J Urol; 2002 May; 167(5):2198-202. PubMed ID: 11956478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Technology insight: Novel ureteral stent materials and designs.
    Chew BH; Denstedt JD
    Nat Clin Pract Urol; 2004 Nov; 1(1):44-8. PubMed ID: 16474466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Ureteric injuries. Clinical and experimental studies.
    Cormio L
    Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl; 1995; 171():1-66. PubMed ID: 8578244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Characterization and assessment of a novel poly(ethylene oxide)/polyurethane composite hydrogel (Aquavene) as a ureteral stent biomaterial.
    Gorman SP; Tunney MM; Keane PF; Van Bladel K; Bley B
    J Biomed Mater Res; 1998 Mar; 39(4):642-9. PubMed ID: 9492227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Swarming of Proteus mirabilis over ureteral stents: a comparative assessment.
    Watterson JD; Cadieux PA; Stickler D; Reid G; Denstedt JD
    J Endourol; 2003 Sep; 17(7):523-7. PubMed ID: 14565887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative assessment of ureteral stent biomaterial encrustation.
    Tunney MM; Keane PF; Jones DS; Gorman SP
    Biomaterials; 1996 Aug; 17(15):1541-6. PubMed ID: 8853126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of a new polytetrafluoroethylene-covered metallic stent to a noncovered stent in canine ureters.
    Chung HH; Lee SH; Cho SB; Park HS; Kim YS; Kang BC; Frisoli JK; Razavi MK
    Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2008; 31(3):619-28. PubMed ID: 18214599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diamond-like carbon coatings on ureteral stents--a new strategy for decreasing the formation of crystalline bacterial biofilms?
    Laube N; Kleinen L; Bradenahl J; Meissner A
    J Urol; 2007 May; 177(5):1923-7. PubMed ID: 17437849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Investigation of a novel degradable ureteral stent in a porcine model.
    Hadaschik BA; Paterson RF; Fazli L; Clinkscales KW; Shalaby SW; Chew BH
    J Urol; 2008 Sep; 180(3):1161-6. PubMed ID: 18639278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of various indwelling ureteral catheter materials on the normal canine ureter.
    Marx M; Bettmann MA; Bridge S; Brodsky G; Boxt LM; Richie JP
    J Urol; 1988 Jan; 139(1):180-5. PubMed ID: 3336093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Phosphorylcholine-coated stents in porcine coronary arteries: in vivo assessment of biocompatibility.
    Malik N; Gunn J; Shepherd L; Crossman DC; Cumberland DC; Holt CM
    J Invasive Cardiol; 2001 Mar; 13(3):193-201. PubMed ID: 11231644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-term biocompatibility evaluation of a novel polymer-coated stent in a porcine coronary stent model.
    Huang Y; Liu X; Wang L; Li S; Verbeken E; De Scheerder I
    Coron Artery Dis; 2003 Aug; 14(5):401-8. PubMed ID: 12878906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of a biodegradable ureteral stent versus the traditional double-J stent for the treatment of ureteral injury: an experimental study.
    Fu WJ; Wang ZX; Li G; Cui FZ; Zhang Y; Zhang X
    Biomed Mater; 2012 Dec; 7(6):065002. PubMed ID: 23047290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Polymers as ureteral stents.
    Venkatesan N; Shroff S; Jayachandran K; Doble M
    J Endourol; 2010 Feb; 24(2):191-8. PubMed ID: 20073560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Flow characteristics of 3 unique ureteral stents: investigation of a Poiseuille flow pattern.
    Olweny EO; Portis AJ; Afane JS; Brewer AV; Shalhav AL; Luszczynski K; McDougall EM; Clayman RV
    J Urol; 2000 Dec; 164(6):2099-103. PubMed ID: 11061935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In vivo evaluation of the third generation biodegradable stent: a novel approach to avoiding the forgotten stent syndrome.
    Chew BH; Paterson RF; Clinkscales KW; Levine BS; Shalaby SW; Lange D
    J Urol; 2013 Feb; 189(2):719-25. PubMed ID: 22982432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Rabbit muscle and urethral in situ biocompatibility properties of the self-reinforced L-lactide-glycolic acid copolymer 80: 20 spiral stent.
    Laaksovirta S; Laurila M; Isotalo T; Välimaa T; Tammela TL; Törmälä P; Talja M
    J Urol; 2002 Mar; 167(3):1527-31. PubMed ID: 11832782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of a novel biodegradable ureteral stent produced from polyurethane and magnesium alloys.
    Jin L; Yao L; Yuan F; Dai G; Xue B
    J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater; 2021 May; 109(5):665-672. PubMed ID: 32929829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The 'buoy' stent: evaluation of a prototype indwelling ureteric stent in a porcine model.
    Krebs A; Deane LA; Borin JF; Edwards RA; Sala LG; Khan F; Abdelshehid C; McDougall EM; Clayman RV
    BJU Int; 2009 Jul; 104(1):88-92. PubMed ID: 19154469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.