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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

253 related items for PubMed ID: 12802611

  • 1. The correlation of preoperative CT, MR imaging, and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings in primary cervical carcinoma.
    Ozsarlak O, Tjalma W, Schepens E, Corthouts B, Op de Beeck B, Van Marck E, Parizel PM, De Schepper AM.
    Eur Radiol; 2003 Oct; 13(10):2338-45. PubMed ID: 12802611
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Primary uterine cervical cancer: correlation of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and clinical staging (FIGO) with histopathology findings.
    Kraljević Z, Visković K, Ledinsky M, Zadravec D, Grbavac I, Bilandzija M, Soljacić-Vranes H, Kuna K, Klasnić K, Krolo I.
    Coll Antropol; 2013 Jun; 37(2):561-8. PubMed ID: 23941005
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Preoperative staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients.
    Kim SH, Choi BI, Han JK, Kim HD, Lee HP, Kang SB, Lee JY, Han MC.
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1993 Jun; 17(4):633-40. PubMed ID: 8331236
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Parametrial involvement in FIGO stage IB1 cervical carcinoma diagnostic impact of tumor diameter in preoperative magnetic resonance imaging.
    Kamimori T, Sakamoto K, Fujiwara K, Umayahara K, Sugiyama Y, Utsugi K, Takeshima N, Tanaka H, Gomi N, Takizawa K.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2011 Feb; 21(2):349-54. PubMed ID: 21721193
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Surgical versus clinical staging prior to primary chemoradiation in patients with cervical cancer FIGO stages IIB-IVA: oncologic results of a prospective randomized international multicenter (Uterus-11) intergroup study.
    Marnitz S, Tsunoda AT, Martus P, Vieira M, Affonso Junior RJ, Nunes J, Budach V, Hertel H, Mustea A, Sehouli J, Scharf JP, Ulrich U, Ebert A, Piwonski I, Kohler C.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Dec; 30(12):1855-1861. PubMed ID: 33293284
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. [Operable stage IB and II cancer of the uterine neck: retrospective comparison between preoperative utero-vaginal curietherapy and initial surgery followed by radiotherapy].
    Atlan D, Touboul E, Deniaud-Alexandre E, Lefranc JP, Ganansia V, Bernard A, Antoine JM, Jannet D, Lhuillier PE, Uzan M, Genestie C, Antoine M, Jamali M, Milliez J, Uzan S, Blondon J.
    Cancer Radiother; 2002 Jun; 6(4):217-37. PubMed ID: 12224488
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Prospective comparison between clinical and CT staging in primary cervical carcinoma.
    Walsh JW, Goplerud DR.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1981 Nov; 137(5):997-1003. PubMed ID: 6975028
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in pretreatment evaluation of early-stage cervical cancer.
    Zhang W, Zhang J, Yang J, Xue H, Cao D, Huang H, Wu M, Cui Q, Chen J, Lang J, Shen K.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2014 Sep; 24(7):1292-8. PubMed ID: 24987919
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Evaluation of carcinoma cervix using magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with clinical FIGO staging and impact on management.
    Dhoot NM, Kumar V, Shinagare A, Kataki AC, Barmon D, Bhuyan U.
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2012 Feb; 56(1):58-65. PubMed ID: 22339747
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Complementary Prognostic Value of Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Whole-Body Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Pretreatment Assessment of Patients With Cervical Cancer.
    Sala E, Micco M, Burger IA, Yakar D, Kollmeier MA, Goldman DA, Gonen M, Park KJ, Abu-Rustum NR, Hricak H, Vargas HA.
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2015 Oct; 25(8):1461-7. PubMed ID: 26397068
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. CT and ultra low field (0.02 T) MR imaging of uterine cervical carcinoma.
    Varpula M, Kilholma P, Klemi P.
    Acta Radiol; 1994 Jul; 35(4):361-6. PubMed ID: 8011386
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. [Diagnostic imaging in invasive cervical carcinoma: MRI, CT, and ultrasonography].
    Michniewicz K, Oellinger J.
    Zentralbl Gynakol; 2001 Apr; 123(4):222-8. PubMed ID: 11370531
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Magnetic resonance imaging-based validation of the 2018 FIGO staging system in patients treated with definitive radiotherapy for locally advanced cervix cancer.
    Kim J, Cho Y, Kim N, Chung SY, Kim JW, Lee IJ, Kim YB.
    Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Mar; 160(3):735-741. PubMed ID: 33358037
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 13.