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 *

175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9305199)

  • 21. [Disposable vs reusable laryngeal mask airway: a cost-minimization analysis].
    Soulias M; Martin L; Garnier N; Juniot A; Aho LS; Freysz M
    Ann Fr Anesth Reanim; 2006 Aug; 25(8):811-4. PubMed ID: 16603333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Comparison of economic and environmental impacts between disposable and reusable instruments used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
    Adler S; Scherrer M; Rückauer KD; Daschner FD
    Surg Endosc; 2005 Feb; 19(2):268-72. PubMed ID: 15580444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps: a prospective cost evaluation.
    Deprez PH; Horsmans Y; Van Hassel M; Hoang P; Piessevaux H; Geubel A
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2000 Mar; 51(3):262-5. PubMed ID: 10699768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. [Re-sterilization of disposable products: a gamble].
    Haindl H
    Pflege Z; 2002 Feb; 55(2):91-4. PubMed ID: 12640997
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Safety evaluation of single-use medical devices after submission to simulated reutilization cycles.
    da Silva MV; Ribeiro Ade F; Pinto Tde J
    J AOAC Int; 2005; 88(3):823-9. PubMed ID: 16001858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Advantages of reusable accessories.
    Wolfsen HC
    Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am; 2000 Apr; 10(2):349-59. PubMed ID: 10683220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A comparison of flow gradients across disposable arterial perfusion cannulas.
    Brodman R; Siegel H; Lesser M; Frater R
    Ann Thorac Surg; 1985 Mar; 39(3):225-33. PubMed ID: 3977463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Reuse of disposables: let's not embrace waste.
    Turi ZG
    Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn; 1996 Jun; 38(2):133-4. PubMed ID: 8776513
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The precautionary principle: what is the risk of reusing disposable drops in routine ophthalmology consultations and what are the costs of reducing this risk to zero?
    Somner JE; Cavanagh DJ; Wong KK; Whitelaw M; Thomson T; Mansfield D
    Eye (Lond); 2010 Feb; 24(2):361-3. PubMed ID: 19521427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Reuse of "single use" medical devices after quality assured reprocessing: hygienic, legal and economic aspects. Potential for cost savings in interventional cardiology].
    Ischinger TA; Neubauer G; Ujlaky R; Schätzl H; Bock M
    Z Kardiol; 2002 Nov; 91(11):889-98. PubMed ID: 12442191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Reusable, re-posable and disposable instrumentation.
    Melzer A; Buess G
    Endosc Surg Allied Technol; 1995; 3(2-3):127-8. PubMed ID: 7552127
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Medical device reprocessing: research and practice.
    Biomed Instrum Technol; 1997; 31(3):221-2. PubMed ID: 9181239
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Disposable versus reusable biopsy forceps. A prospective cost analysis in the gastrointestinal endoscopy unit of the Dijon University Hospital].
    Lejeune C; Prost P; Michiels C; Roullaud-Guenfoudi MP; Phelip JM; Martin L; Rassiat E; Faivre J
    Gastroenterol Clin Biol; 2001; 25(6-7):669-73. PubMed ID: 11673734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A life cycle assessment of reusable and single-use central venous catheter insertion kits.
    McGain F; McAlister S; McGavin A; Story D
    Anesth Analg; 2012 May; 114(5):1073-80. PubMed ID: 22492185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories.
    Petersen BT
    Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am; 2000 Apr; 10(2):341-8. PubMed ID: 10683219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Reuse of single-use medical devices: study shows how to determine cost savings and limits.
    Health Care Cost Reengineering Rep; 1997 Jun; 2(6):93-5. PubMed ID: 10175075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A cost comparison of disposable vs reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
    Demoulin L; Kesteloot K; Penninckx F
    Surg Endosc; 1996 May; 10(5):520-5. PubMed ID: 8658331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. If it is reusable, why not reuse it?
    Belkin NL
    Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol; 2002 Jul; 23(7):357-8. PubMed ID: 12138970
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Reusing single-use devices OK in some cases.
    Hosp Peer Rev; 1997 Mar; 22(3):33-5. PubMed ID: 10165229
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.