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 *

225 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]
    of 12.