Uterine geometry by Wing Sound and hysterography versus direct measurements-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Uterine geometry by Wing Sound and hysterography versus direct measurements

Published:1987-09 Issue:3 Volume:3 Page:237-243
ISSN:0267-4874
Container-title:Advances in Contraception
language:en
Short-container-title:Adv Contracept

Author:

Ismail A. A. A.,Anwar M. Y.,Keshk S. M.,Azazy S. M.,Gaweesh S.,Toppozada M. K.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Obstetrics and Gynecology

Link

http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF01849397.pdf

Reference15 articles.

1. HassonH.M. (1983). Uterine geometry and IUD performance. In: Long-acting Contraception GoldsmithA., ToppozadaM., eds. Chicago, Northwestern University, pp. 157–66

2. ThomasM.N. (1981). Uterine metrology devices for IUD selection. Piact Product News,3(2), 1–4

3. ToppozadaM.K. (1981). Gynaecological and Obstetrical Instruments. Alexandria, Dar Al-Maaref, pp. 21–2

4. Laufe, L. (1981). Report to Battelle IUD subcommittee meeting Chicago, 1974. Quoted in Thomas, M.N. Uterine metrology devices for IUD selection. Piact Product News,3(2), 1–4

5. Zipper, J. (1981). Personal communication to Wheeler, R.G., 1978. Quoted in Thomas, M.N. Uterine metrology devices for IUD selection. Piact Product news,3(2), 1–4

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Uterine Sounding: Is There a Difference between Blind and Hysteroscopically Directed Measurements?;Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology;2018-03

2. Role of uterine forces in intrauterine device embedment, perforation, and expulsion;International Journal of Women's Health;2014-08

3. Assessment of uterine shape and size using Kurz's Cavimeter;Advances in Contraception;1988-06