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

306 related items for PubMed ID: 26115309

  • 1. Reproducibility of Middle Cerebral Artery Stenosis Measurements by DSA: Comparison of the NASCET and WASID Methods.
    Chen L, Zhan Q, Ma C, Liu Q, Zhang X, Tian X, Jiang Y, Dong Y, Chen S, Lu J.
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0130991. PubMed ID: 26115309
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Comparison of NASCET and WASID criteria for the measurement of intracranial stenosis using digital subtraction and computed tomography angiography of the middle cerebral artery.
    Huang J, Degnan AJ, Liu Q, Teng Z, Yue CS, Gillard JH, Lu JP.
    J Neuroradiol; 2012 Dec; 39(5):342-5. PubMed ID: 22197402
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. A comparison between NASCET and ECST methods in the study of carotids: evaluation using Multi-Detector-Row CT angiography.
    Saba L, Mallarini G.
    Eur J Radiol; 2010 Oct; 76(1):42-7. PubMed ID: 19464837
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Carotid stenosis evaluation by 64-slice CTA: comparison of NASCET, ECST and CC grading methods.
    Kılıçkap G, Ergun E, Başbay E, Koşar P, Kosar U.
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2012 Jun; 28(5):1257-66. PubMed ID: 21858656
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Correlation between intracranial vertebral artery stenosis diameter measured by digital subtraction angiography and cross-sectional area measured by optical coherence tomography.
    Feng Y, Wu T, Wang T, Li Y, Li M, Li L, Yang B, Bai X, Zhang X, Wang Y, Gao P, Chen Y, Ma Y, Jiao L.
    J Neurointerv Surg; 2021 Nov; 13(11):1002-1006. PubMed ID: 33229421
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. [Inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of 3.0 T high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging for evaluating atherosclerotic stenosis in the middle cerebral artery].
    Jia Z, Yuan Y, Yang Z, Zhao R, Xu Y, Huang Q, Zhao W, Ma X, Deng X, Hong B, Liu JM.
    Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2014 Oct; 34(10):1402-7. PubMed ID: 25345932
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 14. How should we estimate carotid stenosis using magnetic resonance angiography?
    Vanninen RL, Manninen HI, Partanen PK, Tulla H, Vainio PA.
    Neuroradiology; 1996 May; 38(4):299-305. PubMed ID: 8738083
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Diagnostic accuracy of DSA in carotid artery stenosis: a comparison between stenosis measured on carotid endarterectomy specimens and DSA in 644 cases.
    Svoboda N, Bradac O, Mandys V, Netuka D, Benes V.
    Acta Neurochir (Wien); 2022 Dec; 164(12):3197-3202. PubMed ID: 35945355
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 18. Use of PETRA-MRA to assess intracranial arterial stenosis: Comparison with TOF-MRA, CTA, and DSA.
    Niu J, Ran Y, Chen R, Zhang F, Lei X, Wang X, Li T, Zhu J, Zhang Y, Cheng J, Zhang Y, Zhu C.
    Front Neurol; 2022 Dec; 13():1068132. PubMed ID: 36726752
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 16.