87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9723596)
1. Squamous atypia in the atrophic cervical vaginal smear: a new look at an old problem.
Abati A; Jaffurs W; Wilder AM
Cancer; 1998 Aug; 84(4):218-25. PubMed ID: 9723596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Significance of a diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance for Papanicolaou smears in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.
Keating JT; Wang HH
Cancer; 2001 Apr; 93(2):100-5. PubMed ID: 11309774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical Significance of a cervical cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Favoring a reactive process or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Gonzalez D; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P; Atkinson BF
J Reprod Med; 1996 Oct; 41(10):719-23. PubMed ID: 9026557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. ASCUS on cervical cytologic smears. Clinical significance.
Yang M; Zachariah S
J Reprod Med; 1997 Jun; 42(6):329-31. PubMed ID: 9219118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a comparative review of original and automated rescreen diagnosis of cervicovaginal smears with long term follow-up.
Stastny JF; Remmers RE; London WB; Pedigo MA; Cahill LA; Ryan M; Frable WJ
Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):348-53. PubMed ID: 9438460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Glandular and squamous atypia and intraepithelial lesions in atrophic cervicovaginal smears. One institution's experience.
Acs G; Gupta PK; Baloch ZW
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(4):611-7. PubMed ID: 10934955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: is it worthwhile to qualify them further?
Sodhani P; Gupta S; Sehgal A; Singh V; Khan IU; Mitra AB
Indian J Cancer; 2003; 40(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 14716128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reducing or eliminating use of the category of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance decreases the diagnostic accuracy of the Papanicolaou smear.
Pitman MB; Cibas ES; Powers CN; Renshaw AA; Frable WJ
Cancer; 2002 Jun; 96(3):128-34. PubMed ID: 12115299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Postmenopausal Squamous Atypia: Cytologic Features, Hybrid Capture 2 Tests and Contribution to the ASCUS Pool.
McHugh KE; Reynolds JP; Suarez AA
Acta Cytol; 2018; 62(5-6):418-422. PubMed ID: 30045008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. A cytohistologic study of 52 cases.
Auger M; Charbonneau M; Arseneau J
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(6):1671-5. PubMed ID: 9390122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in women over 55. Comparison with the general population and implications for management.
Rader AE; Rose PG; Rodriguez M; Mansbacher S; Pitlik D; Abdul-Karim FW
Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(3):357-62. PubMed ID: 10349362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cytomorphologic analysis and histological correlation of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in postmenopausal women.
Saad RS; Kanbour-Shakir A; Lu E; Modery J; Kanbour A
Diagn Cytopathol; 2006 Jul; 34(7):467-71. PubMed ID: 16783775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Squamous atypia in the atrophic cervical vaginal smear: a plea for a more painstaking old style look versus a new look at the old problem.
Medley G; Surtees VM
Cancer; 1998 Aug; 84(4):200-1. PubMed ID: 9723593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Should the cytologic diagnosis of "atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance" be qualified? An assessment including comparison between conventional and liquid-based technologies.
Anton RC; Ramzy I; Schwartz MR; Younes P; Chakraborty S; Mody DR
Cancer; 2001 Apr; 93(2):93-9. PubMed ID: 11309773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors.
Davey DD; Naryshkin S; Nielsen ML; Kline TS
Diagn Cytopathol; 1994 Dec; 11(4):390-6. PubMed ID: 7895579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Follow-up of Papanicolaou smears diagnosed as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.
Howell LP; Davis RL
Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Feb; 14(1):20-4. PubMed ID: 8834072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. ThinPrep Pap Test: performance and biopsy follow-up in a university hospital.
Carpenter AB; Davey DD
Cancer; 1999 Jun; 87(3):105-12. PubMed ID: 10385440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Eliminating the diagnosis atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: impact on the accuracy of the Papanicolaou test.
Sodhani P; Gupta S; Singh V; Sehgal A; Mitra AB
Acta Cytol; 2004; 48(6):783-7. PubMed ID: 15581162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. ASCUS: comparative follow-up results related to previous SIL diagnosis.
Alameda F; Fuste P; Conangla M; Gimferrer E; Soler I; Antorn MT; Persico S; Carreras R; Serrano S
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2000; 21(1):81-3. PubMed ID: 10726627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma following the report of three negative Papanicolaou smears: screening failures or rapid progression?
Sherman ME; Kelly D
Mod Pathol; 1992 May; 5(3):337-42. PubMed ID: 1495939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
