230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8913977)
1. 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]
2. The Cell-Sweep. A new cervical cytology sampling device.
Tyau L; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P; Edmonds P
J Reprod Med; 1994 Nov; 39(11):899-902. PubMed ID: 7853282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. The effectiveness and safety of two cervical cytologic techniques during pregnancy.
Stillson T; Knight AL; Elswick RK
J Fam Pract; 1997 Aug; 45(2):159-63. PubMed ID: 9267375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of the endocervical Cytobrush and Cervex-Brush in pregnant women.
Paraiso MF; Brady K; Helmchen R; Roat TW
Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Oct; 84(4):539-43. PubMed ID: 8090390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Comparison of spatula and nonspatula methods for cervical sampling.
Rammou-Kinia R; Anagnostopoulou I; Gomousa M
Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):69-75. PubMed ID: 1994638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Improved endocervical sampling with the Cytobrush.
Chalvardjian A; De Marchi WG; Bell V; Nishikawa R
CMAJ; 1991 Feb; 144(3):313-7. PubMed ID: 1989710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A randomized clinical trial comparing the Cytobrush and cotton swab for Papanicolaou smears.
Koonings PP; Dickinson K; d'Ablaing G; Schlaerth JB
Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Aug; 80(2):241-5. PubMed ID: 1635737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Endocervical brush versus cotton swab for obtaining cervical smears at a clinic. A cost comparison.
Harrison DD; Hernandez E; Dunton CJ
J Reprod Med; 1993 Apr; 38(4):285-8. PubMed ID: 8501736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A randomized trial of three methods of obtaining Papanicolaou smears.
Pretorius RG; Sadeghi M; Fotheringham N; Semrad N; Watring WG
Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Nov; 78(5 Pt 1):831-6. PubMed ID: 1923208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cervical smears following laser treatment. Comparison of Cervex brush versus Cytobrush-Ayre spatula sampling.
Szarewski A; Cuzick J; Singer A
Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):76-8. PubMed ID: 1994639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Controlled evaluation of implementing the Cytobrush technique to improve Papanicolaou smear quality.
Murata PJ; Johnson RA; McNicoll KE
Obstet Gynecol; 1990 Apr; 75(4):690-5. PubMed ID: 2314788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [The use of the cervix brush for early diagnosis of cervix uteri cancer: quality of the smear].
Weyler J; Engels H
Arch Belg; 1989; 47(1-4):81-4. PubMed ID: 2610580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cervex-Brush vs. spatula and Cytobrush. A cytohistologic evaluation.
Risberg B; Andersson A; Zetterberg C; Nordin B
J Reprod Med; 1997 Jul; 42(7):405-8. PubMed ID: 9252930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Specimen adequacy and the ThinPrep Pap Test: the endocervical component.
Selvaggi SM; Guidos BJ
Diagn Cytopathol; 2000 Jul; 23(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 10907927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Comparison of the Cytobrush plus plastic spatula with the Cervex Brush for obtaining endocervical cells.
Cannon JM; Blythe JG
Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Oct; 82(4 Pt 1):569-72. PubMed ID: 8377984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Sampling accuracy of the modified Ayre spatula/Zelsmyr Cytobrush versus the modified Ayre spatula/bulb aspirator in the collection of cells from the uterine cervix.
Selvaggi SM; Malviya V
Diagn Cytopathol; 1991; 7(3):318-22. PubMed ID: 1879271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]