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

128 related items for PubMed ID: 23034067

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Value of endocervical margin and high-risk human papillomavirus status after conization for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, adenocarcinoma in situ, and microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix.
    Kong TW, Son JH, Chang SJ, Paek J, Lee Y, Ryu HS.
    Gynecol Oncol; 2014 Dec; 135(3):468-73. PubMed ID: 25284039
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Predictors and clinical significance of the positive cone margin in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III patients.
    Sun XG, Ma SQ, Zhang JX, Wu M.
    Chin Med J (Engl); 2009 Feb 20; 122(4):367-72. PubMed ID: 19302737
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Factors associated with cone margin involvement in CIN patients undergoing conization-equivalent electrosurgical procedure.
    Costa S, De Nuzzo M, Terzano P, Santini D, De Simone P, Bovicelli A, Bovicelli L, Bucchi L.
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2000 Jul 20; 79(7):586-92. PubMed ID: 10929960
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Identification of appropriate cone length to avoid positive cone margin in high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
    Kawano K, Tsuda N, Nishio S, Yonemoto K, Tasaki K, Tasaki R, Ushijima K.
    J Gynecol Oncol; 2016 Sep 20; 27(5):e54. PubMed ID: 27401478
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Should attention be paid to the cone depth in the fully visible transformation zone? Retrospective analysis of 517 patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3.
    Giannella L, Delli Carpini G, Di Giuseppe J, Gardella B, Bogani G, Monti E, Liverani CA, Roncella E, Raspagliesi F, Spinillo A, Vercellini P, Ciavattini A.
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2023 Apr 20; 161(1):137-143. PubMed ID: 36263898
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. [Study on high risk factors associated with positive margin of cervix conization in patient with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia].
    Lu HX, Chen YX, Ni J, Wan XY, Lü WG, Xie X.
    Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2009 Mar 20; 44(3):200-3. PubMed ID: 19570446
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Predictive factors from cold knife conization for residual cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in subsequent hysterectomy.
    Moore BC, Higgins RV, Laurent SL, Marroum MC, Bellitt P.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Aug 20; 173(2):361-6; discussion 366-8. PubMed ID: 7645609
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Appropriate cone dimensions to achieve negative excision margins after large loop excision of transformation zone in the uterine cervix for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
    Papoutsis D, Rodolakis A, Mesogitis S, Sotiropoulou M, Antsaklis A.
    Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2013 Aug 20; 75(3):163-8. PubMed ID: 23296191
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II-III with endocervical cone margin involvement after cervical loop conization: is there any predictor for residual disease?
    Kietpeerakool C, Khunamornpong S, Srisomboon J, Siriaunkgul S, Suprasert P.
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2007 Oct 20; 33(5):660-4. PubMed ID: 17845326
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Positive margin status in uterine cervix cone specimens is associated with persistent/recurrent high-grade dysplasia.
    Shaco-Levy R, Eger G, Dreiher J, Benharroch D, Meirovitz M.
    Int J Gynecol Pathol; 2014 Jan 20; 33(1):83-8. PubMed ID: 24300540
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Outcome after conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III: relation with surgical margins, extension to the crypts and mitoses.
    Maluf PJ, Adad SJ, Murta EF.
    Tumori; 2004 Jan 20; 90(5):473-7. PubMed ID: 15656332
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. An Abnormal Precone Endocervical Curettage Result Is an Independent Risk Factor for Positive Margins in Conization Specimens.
    An J, Lei H, Xie X, Sun P.
    Oncol Res Treat; 2020 Jan 20; 43(10):518-525. PubMed ID: 32772026
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Predictive factors for residual disease in hysterectomy specimens after conization in early-stage cervical cancer.
    Wong AS, Li WH, Cheung TH.
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Apr 20; 199():21-6. PubMed ID: 26894378
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Is Endocervical Glandular Involvement Related to The Depth of Cone Biopsy?
    Akis S, Keles E, Ozyurek SE, Purut YE, Ozturk UK, Kabaca C, Api M, Cetiner H.
    Int J Surg Pathol; 2023 Feb 20; 31(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 35651307
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Minimal cold knife conization height for high-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesion treatment.
    Kliemann LM, Silva M, Reinheimer M, Rivoire WA, Capp E, Dos Reis R.
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2012 Dec 20; 165(2):342-6. PubMed ID: 22948133
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Predictive factors used to justify hysterectomy after loop conization: increasing age and severity of disease.
    Kalogirou D, Antoniou G, Karakitsos P, Botsis D, Kalogirou O, Giannikos L.
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 1997 Dec 20; 18(2):113-6. PubMed ID: 9105859
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. The Appropriate of Cone Depth in Loop Electrical Excision Procedure (LEEP) for Negative Pathological Margin from High Grade Precancerous Lesion of Cervix, Retrospective Study.
    Srijarusith N, Rodpenpear N.
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2022 Feb 01; 23(2):659-664. PubMed ID: 35225479
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Management of stage Ia1 squamous cervical cancer and the importance of excision margins: a retrospective study of long-term outcome after 25 years of follow-up.
    Papakonstantinou K, Kyrgiou M, Lyons D, Soutter WP, Ghaem-Maghami S.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec 01; 211(6):625.e1-6. PubMed ID: 24949540
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 7.