148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8040848)
1. Histopathologic adequacy of office endometrial biopsies taken with the Z-sampler and Novak curette in premenopausal and postmenopausal women.
Larson DM; Broste SK
J Reprod Med; 1994 Apr; 39(4):300-3. PubMed ID: 8040848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of the Z-sampler and Novak endometrial biopsy instruments for in-office diagnosis of endometrial cancer.
Larson DM; Krawisz BR; Johnson KK; Broste SK
Gynecol Oncol; 1994 Jul; 54(1):64-7. PubMed ID: 8020841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of late luteal phase endometrial biopsies using the Novak curette or PIPELLE endometrial suction curette.
Hill GA; Herbert CM; Parker RA; Wentz AC
Obstet Gynecol; 1989 Mar; 73(3 Pt 1):443-5. PubMed ID: 2915869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of D&C and office endometrial biopsy in predicting final histopathologic grade in endometrial cancer.
Larson DM; Johnson KK; Broste SK; Krawisz BR; Kresl JJ
Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Jul; 86(1):38-42. PubMed ID: 7784020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of Novak and Pipelle endometrial biopsy instruments.
Silver MM; Miles P; Rosa C
Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Nov; 78(5 Pt 1):828-30. PubMed ID: 1923207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of endometrial changes among symptomatic tamoxifen-treated and nontreated premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer patients.
Cheng WF; Lin HH; Torng PL; Huang SC
Gynecol Oncol; 1997 Aug; 66(2):233-7. PubMed ID: 9264568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the Pipelle curette for endometrial biopsy.
Henig I; Chan P; Tredway DR; Maw GM; Gullett AJ; Cheatwood M
J Reprod Med; 1989 Oct; 34(10):786-9. PubMed ID: 2795561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Factors affecting adequacy of Pipelle and Tao Brush endometrial sampling.
Williams AR; Brechin S; Porter AJ; Warner P; Critchley HO
BJOG; 2008 Jul; 115(8):1028-36. PubMed ID: 18651884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Endometrial biopsy using a plastic curette (Mi-Mark).
Ansari AH; Essien JD; Hoffman D; Ansari VM
Int J Fertil; 1981; 26(1):45-8. PubMed ID: 6113208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Bethesda System 2001 recommendation for reporting of benign appearing endometrial cells in Pap tests of women age 40 years and older leads to unwarranted surveillance when followed without clinical qualifiers.
Aslan DL; Crapanzano JP; Harshan M; Erroll M; Vakil B; Pirog EC
Gynecol Oncol; 2007 Oct; 107(1):86-93. PubMed ID: 17604086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A prospective evaluation of an endometrial suction curette.
Nolan TE; Smith RP; Smith MT; Gallup DC
J Gynecol Surg; 1992; 8(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 10148372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Incidence of endometrial carcinoma after hysterectomy for atypical hyperplasia or FIGO stage IA carcinoma diagnosed on endometrial biopsy or endometrial resection].
Ploteau S; Squifflet JL; Berlière M; Marbaix E; Donnez J
Bull Cancer; 2008 May; 95(5):556-62. PubMed ID: 18541521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The safety and acceptability of Pipelle endometrial sampling in premenopausal women in comparison to postmenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding.
Rezk M; Dawood R; Masood A
Minerva Ginecol; 2016 Oct; 68(5):492-6. PubMed ID: 27430200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques: specimen adequacy.
Sierecki AR; Gudipudi DK; Montemarano N; Del Priore G
J Reprod Med; 2008 Oct; 53(10):760-4. PubMed ID: 19004401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Can we rely on blind endometrial biopsy for detection of focal intrauterine pathology?
Svirsky R; Smorgick N; Rozowski U; Sagiv R; Feingold M; Halperin R; Pansky M
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Aug; 199(2):115.e1-3. PubMed ID: 18456238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Significant difference in the frequency of out-of-phase endometrial biopsies depending on the use of the Novak curette or the flexible polypropylene endometrial biopsy cannula ('Pipelle').
Honoré LH; Cumming DC; Fahmy N
Gynecol Obstet Invest; 1988; 26(4):338-40. PubMed ID: 3229667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reporting endometrial cells in women 40 years and older: assessing the clinical usefulness of Bethesda 2001.
Simsir A; Carter W; Elgert P; Cangiarella J
Am J Clin Pathol; 2005 Apr; 123(4):571-5. PubMed ID: 15743742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The clinical significance of benign-appearing endometrial cells on a Papanicolaou test in women 40 years or older.
Browne TJ; Genest DR; Cibas ES
Am J Clin Pathol; 2005 Dec; 124(6):834-7. PubMed ID: 16416731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical evaluation of the Pipelle endometrial suction curette for timed endometrial biopsies.
Check JH; Chase JS; Nowroozi K; Wu CH; Chern R
J Reprod Med; 1989 Mar; 34(3):218-20. PubMed ID: 2724236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A prospective, randomized comparison of the Pipelle endometrial sampling device with the Novak curette.
Stovall TG; Ling FW; Morgan PL
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Nov; 165(5 Pt 1):1287-90. PubMed ID: 1957847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
