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 *

194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8041524)

  • 21. Improved endocervical cell yield with Cytobrush.
    Deckert JJ; Staten SF; Palermo V
    J Fam Pract; 1988 Jun; 26(6):639-41. PubMed ID: 3379366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and Cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology. Improvements in smear quality and detection rates.
    Boon ME; Alons-van Kordelaar JJ; Rietveld-Scheffers PE
    Acta Cytol; 1986; 30(3):264-70. PubMed ID: 3521176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The Cytobrush effect on Pap smear adequacy.
    Davey-Sullivan B; Gearhart J; Evers CG; Cason Z; Replogle WH
    Fam Pract Res J; 1991 Mar; 11(1):57-64. PubMed ID: 2028815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The efficiency of the Cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells in cervical smears.
    Trimbos JB; Arentz NP
    Acta Cytol; 1986; 30(3):261-3. PubMed ID: 3521175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of four cytologic sampling techniques in a large family planning center.
    Szarewski A; Curran G; Edwards R; Cuzick J; Kocjan G; Bounds W; Guillebaud J
    Acta Cytol; 1993; 37(4):457-60. PubMed ID: 8328239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparing the yield of the standard Papanicolaou and endocervical brush smears.
    Hoffman MS; Hill DA; Gordy LW; Lane J; Cavanagh D
    J Reprod Med; 1991 Apr; 36(4):267-9. PubMed ID: 1649306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears.
    Boon ME; de Graaff Guilloud JC; Rietveld WJ
    Acta Cytol; 1989; 33(6):843-8. PubMed ID: 2588917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The optimal technique for obtaining a Papanicolaou smear with the Cervex-Brush.
    Ferris DG; Berrey MM; Ellis KE; Petry LJ; Voxnaes J; Beatie RT
    J Fam Pract; 1992 Mar; 34(3):276-80. PubMed ID: 1541953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Spatula/cytobrush vs. spatula/cotton swab detection of cervical condylomatous lesions.
    Selvaggi SM
    J Reprod Med; 1989 Sep; 34(9):629-33. PubMed ID: 2810246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Optimal sampling devices for liquid-based procedure in screening for cervical cancer: comparison between cotton stick/Cytobrush and Cervex-Brush.
    Kuramoto H; Banno M; Hori M; Miyagawa J; Iida M; Kawaguchi M
    Acta Cytol; 2013; 57(2):153-8. PubMed ID: 23406881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of cytobrush with Cervex-Brush for endocervical cytologic sampling.
    Neinstein LS; Church J; Akiyoshi T
    J Adolesc Health; 1992 Sep; 13(6):520-3. PubMed ID: 1390820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Cell surplus on sampling devices after routine cervical cytologic smears. A study of residual cell populations.
    Goodman A; Hutchinson ML
    J Reprod Med; 1996 Apr; 41(4):239-41. PubMed ID: 8728075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Improved endocervical sampling and HPV viral load detection by Cervex-Brush Combi.
    Depuydt CE; Benoy IH; Bailleul EJ; Vandepitte J; Vereecken AJ; Bogers JJ
    Cytopathology; 2006 Dec; 17(6):374-81. PubMed ID: 17168921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Modified endocervical vaginal smear for diagnosis of endocervical microinvasive cervix carcinoma].
    Melsheimer P; Hahn U; Herberling D; Wallwiener D; Rummel HH; Bastert G
    Zentralbl Gynakol; 1995; 117(11):608-10. PubMed ID: 8533497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Acceptable quality cervical cytology taking: comparison of Cervex-brush and Cervex-mex methods].
    Ojeda Ortiz J; Muñoz Molina R; Pardo López M; Guevara Cruz M; Hernández Quijano T; Valencia Elizondo C; Hernández Valencia M
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2008 Jul; 76(7):381-5. PubMed ID: 18798438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Clinical Significance of a cervical cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Favoring a reactive process or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
    Gonzalez D; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P; Atkinson BF
    J Reprod Med; 1996 Oct; 41(10):719-23. PubMed ID: 9026557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Cervical cytology: a randomized comparison of four sampling methods.
    McCord ML; Stovall TG; Meric JL; Summitt RL; Coleman SA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Jun; 166(6 Pt 1):1772-7; discussion 1777-9. PubMed ID: 1615986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Efficacy of the cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells.
    Kristensen GB; Hølund B; Grinsted P
    Acta Cytol; 1989; 33(6):849-51. PubMed ID: 2588918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Safety, efficacy and cost of three cervical cytology sampling devices in a prenatal clinic.
    Smith-Levitin M; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P
    J Reprod Med; 1996 Oct; 41(10):749-53. PubMed ID: 8913977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Comparative yield of endocervical and metaplastic cells. Two sampling techniques: wooden spatula and cytology brush.
    Lo L; Jordan J
    Can Fam Physician; 1995 Sep; 41():1497-502. PubMed ID: 8520238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.