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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9050707)

  • 1. A cost-effectiveness evaluation of laparoscopic disposable versus nondisposable infraumbilical cannulas.
    Ransom SB; McNeeley SG; White C; Diamond MP
    J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc; 1996 Nov; 4(1):25-8. PubMed ID: 9050707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reuse of disposable laparoscopic instruments: cost analysis.
    DesCôteaux JG; Tye L; Poulin EC
    Can J Surg; 1996 Apr; 39(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 8769924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of reusable versus disposable laparoscopic instrument costs.
    Eddie G; White S
    Aust N Z J Surg; 1996 Oct; 66(10):671-5. PubMed ID: 8855921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Technical and economic feasibility of reusing disposable perfusion cannulas.
    Bloom DF; Cornhill JF; Malchesky PS; Richardson DM; Bolsen KA; Haire DM; Loop FD; Cosgrove DM
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 1997 Sep; 114(3):448-60. PubMed ID: 9305199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Single-use versus reusable laparoscopic surgical instruments: a comparative cost analysis.
    Schaer GN; Koechli OR; Haller U
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Dec; 173(6):1812-5. PubMed ID: 8610767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopy in children.
    Luks FI; Logan J; Breuer CK; Kurkchubasche AG; Wesselhoeft CW; Tracy TF
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med; 1999 Sep; 153(9):965-8. PubMed ID: 10482214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The use of stab incisions for instrument access in laparoscopic urological procedures.
    Hanson GR; Castle EP; Ostlie DJ; Holcomb GW; Murphy JP; Gatti JM
    J Urol; 2004 Nov; 172(5 Pt 1):1967-9. PubMed ID: 15540767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cost-effective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
    Slater M; Booth MI; Dehn TC
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2009 Nov; 91(8):670-2. PubMed ID: 19785946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A prospective comparison of the costs of reusable and limited-reuse laparoscopic instruments.
    DesCôteaux JG; Blackmore K; Parsons L
    Can J Surg; 1998 Apr; 41(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 9575997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Systematic review of reusable versus disposable laparoscopic instruments: costs and safety.
    Siu J; Hill AG; MacCormick AD
    ANZ J Surg; 2017 Jan; 87(1-2):28-33. PubMed ID: 27878921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Disposable versus reusable instruments in laparoscopic surgery--a controlled study].
    Paolucci V; Schaeff B; Gutt C; Morawe G; Encke A
    Zentralbl Chir; 1995; 120(1):47-52. PubMed ID: 7887039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reuse of disposable laparoscopic instruments: a study of related surgical complications.
    DesCôteaux JG; Poulin EC; Lortie M; Murray G; Gingras S
    Can J Surg; 1995 Dec; 38(6):497-500. PubMed ID: 7497363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal hysterectomy in a community hospital.
    Redwine DB
    J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc; 1995 May; 2(3):305-10. PubMed ID: 9050574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. ["Disposable versus reusable instruments in laparoscopic surgery--a controlled study"].
    Engert K
    Zentralbl Chir; 1995; 120(5):416. PubMed ID: 7610732
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surgery.
    Cuschieri A
    Health Econ; 1993 Dec; 2(4):367-9. PubMed ID: 8142999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reusable instruments are more cost-effective than disposable instruments for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
    Apelgren KN; Blank ML; Slomski CA; Hadjis NS
    Surg Endosc; 1994 Jan; 8(1):32-4. PubMed ID: 8153862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Single-patient-use laparoscopic instrumentation: a company perspective.
    Straface S
    Endosc Surg Allied Technol; 1995; 3(2-3):135-9. PubMed ID: 7552130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Robotic Single-Site and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecology: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Analysis of a Matched Case-Control Study.
    El Hachem L; Andikyan V; Mathews S; Friedman K; Poeran J; Shieh K; Geoghegan M; Gretz HF
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(5):760-8. PubMed ID: 26992935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cost-benefit analysis of laparoscopic versus laparotomy salpingo-oophorectomy for benign tubo-ovarian disease.
    Vilos GA; Alshimmiri MM
    J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc; 1995 May; 2(3):299-303. PubMed ID: 9147861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cost analysis of minimally invasive surgery in a pediatric setting.
    Mahomed AA; McLean V
    J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2007 Jun; 17(3):375-9. PubMed ID: 17570792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.