Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 13

1.

Results of an Australian trial using SurePath liquid-based cervical cytology with FocalPoint computer-assisted screening technology.

Bowditch RC, Clarke JM, Baird PJ, Greenberg ML.

Diagn Cytopathol. 2012 Dec;40(12):1093-9. doi: 10.1002/dc.21848. Epub 2011 Nov 1.

PMID:
22045553
2.
3.

[Computer-assisted diagnostics in cervical cytology].

Ikenberg H.

Pathologe. 2011 Nov;32(6):476-83. doi: 10.1007/s00292-011-1477-4. Review. German.

PMID:
22038134
4.

Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Arbyn M, Bergeron C, Klinkhamer P, Martin-Hirsch P, Siebers AG, Bulten J.

Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jan;111(1):167-77. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000296488.85807.b3. Review.

PMID:
18165406
5.

New developments in endocervical glandular lesions.

McCluggage WG.

Histopathology. 2013 Jan;62(1):138-60. doi: 10.1111/his.12012. Epub 2012 Nov 8. Review.

PMID:
23134447
6.

Cell preparation methods and criteria for sample adequacy. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary. Diagnostic Cytology Towards the 21st Century: An International Expert Conference and Tutorial.

McGoogan E, Colgan TJ, Ramzy I, Cochand-Priollet B, Davey DD, Grohs HK, Gurley AM, Husain OA, Hutchinson ML, Knesel EA Jr, Linder J, Mango LJ, Mitchell H, Peebles A, Reith A, Robinowitz M, Sauer T, Shida S, Solomon D, Topalidis T, Wilbur DC, Yamauchi K.

Acta Cytol. 1998 Jan-Feb;42(1):25-32. Review.

PMID:
9479321
7.

The spectrum of cervical glandular neoplasia and issues in differential diagnosis.

Loureiro J, Oliva E.

Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014 Apr;138(4):453-83. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0493-RA. Review.

PMID:
24678677
8.

Gynecologic cytology on conventional and liquid-based preparations: a comprehensive review of similarities and differences.

Hoda RS, Loukeris K, Abdul-Karim FW.

Diagn Cytopathol. 2013 Mar;41(3):257-78. doi: 10.1002/dc.22842. Epub 2012 Apr 17. Review.

PMID:
22508662
9.

Development of an expert system as a diagnostic support of cervical cancer in atypical glandular cells, based on fuzzy logics and image interpretation.

Domínguez Hernández KR, Aguilar Lasserre AA, Posada Gómez R, Palet Guzmán JA, González Sánchez BE.

Comput Math Methods Med. 2013;2013:796387. doi: 10.1155/2013/796387. Epub 2013 Apr 18. Review.

10.

Effect of study design and quality on unsatisfactory rates, cytology classifications, and accuracy in liquid-based versus conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review.

Davey E, Barratt A, Irwig L, Chan SF, Macaskill P, Mannes P, Saville AM.

Lancet. 2006 Jan 14;367(9505):122-32. Review.

PMID:
16413876
11.

[The importance of screening in oncogynecology].

Frühauf F, Sláma J, Zikán M.

Ceska Gynekol. 2014 Dec;79(6):491-8. Review. Czech.

PMID:
25585558
12.

The role of liquid-based preparation in the evaluation of endometrial cytology.

Norimatsu Y, Yanoh K, Kobayashi TK.

Acta Cytol. 2013;57(5):423-35. doi: 10.1159/000353148. Epub 2013 Sep 7. Review.

13.

The HOME microscope workstation. A new tool for cervical cancer screening.

Morens A, Krief B, Brugal G.

Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 1992 Aug;14(4):289-94. Review.

PMID:
1388565

Supplemental Content

Support Center