229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9647372)
1. Relative contribution of Ki-ras gene analysis and brush cytology during ERCP for the diagnosis of biliary and pancreatic diseases.
Van Laethem JL; Bourgeois V; Parma J; Delhaye M; Cochaux P; Velu T; Devière J; Cremer M
Gastrointest Endosc; 1998 Jun; 47(6):479-85. PubMed ID: 9647372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Detection of c-Ki-ras gene codon 12 mutations from pancreatic duct brushings in the diagnosis of pancreatic tumours.
Van Laethem JL; Vertongen P; Deviere J; Van Rampelbergh J; Rickaert F; Cremer M; Robberecht P
Gut; 1995 May; 36(5):781-7. PubMed ID: 7797131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Prospective comparative study of ERCP brush cytology and EUS-FNA for the differential diagnosis of biliary strictures].
Novis M; Ardengh JC; Libera ED; Nakao FS; Ornellas LC; Santo GC; Venco F; Ferrari AP
Rev Col Bras Cir; 2010 Jun; 37(3):190-8. PubMed ID: 21079891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The combination of stricture dilation, endoscopic needle aspiration, and biliary brushings significantly improves diagnostic yield from malignant bile duct strictures.
Farrell RJ; Jain AK; Brandwein SL; Wang H; Chuttani R; Pleskow DK
Gastrointest Endosc; 2001 Nov; 54(5):587-94. PubMed ID: 11677474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of the novel quantitative ARMS assay and an enriched PCR-ASO assay for K-ras mutations with conventional cytology on endobiliary brush cytology from 312 consecutive extrahepatic biliary stenoses.
van Heek NT; Clayton SJ; Sturm PD; Walker J; Gouma DJ; Noorduyn LA; Offerhaus GJ; Fox JC
J Clin Pathol; 2005 Dec; 58(12):1315-20. PubMed ID: 16311354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Use of microsatellite marker loss of heterozygosity in accurate diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary malignancy from brush cytology samples.
Khalid A; Pal R; Sasatomi E; Swalsky P; Slivka A; Whitcomb D; Finkelstein S
Gut; 2004 Dec; 53(12):1860-5. PubMed ID: 15542529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accuracy and complication rate of brush cytology from bile duct versus pancreatic duct.
Vandervoort J; Soetikno RM; Montes H; Lichtenstein DR; Van Dam J; Ruymann FW; Cibas ES; Carr-Locke DL
Gastrointest Endosc; 1999 Mar; 49(3 Pt 1):322-7. PubMed ID: 10049415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of flow cytometry for DNA content and brush cytology for detection of malignancy in pancreaticobiliary strictures.
Ryan ME; Baldauf MC
Gastrointest Endosc; 1994; 40(2 Pt 1):133-9. PubMed ID: 8013809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A prospective randomised study of dense Infinity cytological brush versus regularly used brush in pancreaticobiliary malignancy.
Kylänpää L; Boyd S; Ristimäki A; Lindström O; Udd M; Halttunen J
Scand J Gastroenterol; 2016; 51(5):590-3. PubMed ID: 26642244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Diagnostic Yield of Malignancy Comparing Cytology, FISH, and Molecular Analysis of Cell Free Cytology Brush Supernatant in Patients With Biliary Strictures Undergoing Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiography (ERC): A Prospective Study.
Kushnir VM; Mullady DK; Das K; Lang G; Hollander TG; Murad FM; Jackson SA; Toney NA; Finkelstein SD; Edmundowicz SA
J Clin Gastroenterol; 2019 Oct; 53(9):686-692. PubMed ID: 30106834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Benign, dysplastic, or malignant--making sense of endoscopic bile duct brush cytology: results in 149 consecutive patients.
Lee JG; Leung JW; Baillie J; Layfield LJ; Cotton PB
Am J Gastroenterol; 1995 May; 90(5):722-6. PubMed ID: 7733076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Biliary Brush Cytology Revisited.
Mehmood S; Loya A; Yusuf MA
Acta Cytol; 2016; 60(2):167-72. PubMed ID: 27221813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Diagnostic utility of K-ras mutational analysis on bile obtained by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Lee JG; Leung JW; Cotton PB; Layfield LJ; Mannon PJ
Gastrointest Endosc; 1995 Oct; 42(4):317-20. PubMed ID: 8536899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Endoscopic cytology in biliary strictures. Personal experience.
Geraci G; Pisello F; Arnone E; Modica G; Sciumè C
G Chir; 2008 Oct; 29(10):403-6. PubMed ID: 18947461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predictive factors for positive diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures by transpapillary brush cytology and forceps biopsy.
Naitoh I; Nakazawa T; Kato A; Hayashi K; Miyabe K; Shimizu S; Kondo H; Nishi Y; Yoshida M; Umemura S; Hori Y; Kuno T; Takahashi S; Ohara H; Joh T
J Dig Dis; 2016 Jan; 17(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 26717051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of KRAS mutation analysis and FISH for detecting pancreatobiliary tract cancer in cytology specimens collected during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Kipp BR; Fritcher EG; Clayton AC; Gores GJ; Roberts LR; Zhang J; Levy MJ; Halling KC
J Mol Diagn; 2010 Nov; 12(6):780-6. PubMed ID: 20864634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Sensitivity of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography standard cytology: 10-y review of the literature.
Burnett AS; Calvert TJ; Chokshi RJ
J Surg Res; 2013 Sep; 184(1):304-11. PubMed ID: 23866788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Next-Generation Sequencing and Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization Have Comparable Performance Characteristics in the Analysis of Pancreaticobiliary Brushings for Malignancy.
Dudley JC; Zheng Z; McDonald T; Le LP; Dias-Santagata D; Borger D; Batten J; Vernovsky K; Sweeney B; Arpin RN; Brugge WR; Forcione DG; Pitman MB; Iafrate AJ
J Mol Diagn; 2016 Jan; 18(1):124-30. PubMed ID: 26596524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Brush cytology of ductal strictures during ERCP.
Macken E; Drijkoningen M; Van Aken E; Van Steenbergen W
Acta Gastroenterol Belg; 2000; 63(3):254-9. PubMed ID: 11189981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Endoscopic retrograde brush cytology. A new technique.
Venu RP; Geenen JE; Kini M; Hogan WJ; Payne M; Johnson GK; Schmalz MJ
Gastroenterology; 1990 Nov; 99(5):1475-9. PubMed ID: 2210255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
