260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12932927)
1. Radical perineal prostatectomy: cost efficient, outcome effective, minimally invasive prostate cancer management.
Harris MJ
Eur Urol; 2003 Sep; 44(3):303-8; discussion 308. PubMed ID: 12932927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The anatomic radical perineal prostatectomy: an outcomes-based evolution.
Harris MJ
Eur Urol; 2007 Jul; 52(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 17084506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Radical perineal prostatectomy--surgical technique, first results].
Mshvildadze ShT; Udzhmadzhuridze AN; Managadze GL; Shtakl' V
Georgian Med News; 2007 Feb; (143):58-63. PubMed ID: 17404442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative effectiveness of perineal versus retropubic and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy.
Prasad SM; Gu X; Lavelle R; Lipsitz SR; Hu JC
J Urol; 2011 Jan; 185(1):111-5. PubMed ID: 21074198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Patterns of care for radical prostatectomy in the United States from 2003 to 2005.
Hu JC; Hevelone ND; Ferreira MD; Lipsitz SR; Choueiri TK; Sanda MG; Earle CC
J Urol; 2008 Nov; 180(5):1969-74. PubMed ID: 18801512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Perineal versus retropubic radical prostatectomy for T1, T2 prostate cancer.
Haab F; Boccon-Gibod L; Delmas V; Boccon-Gibod L; Toublanc M
Br J Urol; 1994 Nov; 74(5):626-9. PubMed ID: 7530127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Erectile Function and Oncologic Outcomes Following Open Retropubic and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results from the LAParoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open Trial.
Sooriakumaran P; Pini G; Nyberg T; Derogar M; Carlsson S; Stranne J; Bjartell A; Hugosson J; Steineck G; Wiklund PN
Eur Urol; 2018 Apr; 73(4):618-627. PubMed ID: 28882327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Long-term oncological and continence outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-centre experience.
Busch J; Stephan C; Herold A; Erber B; Kempkensteffen C; Hinz S; Lein M; Weikert S; Miller K; Magheli A
BJU Int; 2012 Dec; 110(11 Pt C):E985-90. PubMed ID: 22672442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Radical perineal prostatectomy: An outdated procedure?
Comploj E; Palermo S; Trenti E; Martini T; Lodde M; Mian C; Mazzoleni G; Pycha A
Int J Surg; 2011; 9(5):400-3. PubMed ID: 21443972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The anatomic radical perineal prostatectomy: a contemporary and anatomic approach.
Harris MJ; Thompson IM
Urology; 1996 Nov; 48(5):762-8. PubMed ID: 8911522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Patient-reported impotence and incontinence after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy.
Talcott JA; Rieker P; Propert KJ; Clark JA; Wishnow KI; Loughlin KR; Richie JP; Kantoff PW
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1997 Aug; 89(15):1117-23. PubMed ID: 9262249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of nerve sparing technique on patient self-assessed outcomes after radical perineal prostatectomy.
Kübler HR; Tseng TY; Sun L; Vieweg J; Harris MJ; Dahm P
J Urol; 2007 Aug; 178(2):488-92; discussion 492. PubMed ID: 17561133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the perineal approach increases the risk of surgically induced positive margins and capsular incisions.
Boccon-Gibod L; Ravery V; Vordos D; Toublanc M; Delmas V; Boccon-Gibod L
J Urol; 1998 Oct; 160(4):1383-5. PubMed ID: 9751359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Open radical retropubic prostatectomy gives favourable surgical and functional outcomes after transurethral resection of the prostate.
Palisaar JR; Wenske S; Sommerer F; Hinkel A; Noldus J
BJU Int; 2009 Sep; 104(5):611-5. PubMed ID: 19298408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Early prostate-specific antigen failure following radical perineal versus retropubic prostatectomy: the importance of seminal vesicle excision.
Theodorescu D; Lippert MC; Broder SR; Boyd JC
Urology; 1998 Feb; 51(2):277-82. PubMed ID: 9495711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Open radical retropubic prostatectomy using high anterior release of the levator fascia and constant haptic feedback in bilateral neurovascular bundle preservation plus early postoperative phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibition: a contemporary series.
Hubanks JM; Umbreit EC; Karnes RJ; Myers RP
Eur Urol; 2012 May; 61(5):878-84. PubMed ID: 22154730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of outcomes between pure laparoscopic vs robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a study of comparative effectiveness based upon validated quality of life outcomes.
Willis DL; Gonzalgo ML; Brotzman M; Feng Z; Trock B; Su LM
BJU Int; 2012 Mar; 109(6):898-905. PubMed ID: 21933328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bilateral nerve sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is associated with faster continence recovery but not with erectile function recovery compared with retropubic open prostatectomy: the need for accurate selection of patients.
Ludovico GM; Dachille G; Pagliarulo G; D'Elia C; Mondaini N; Gacci M; Detti B; Malossini G; Bartoletti R; Cai T
Oncol Rep; 2013 Jun; 29(6):2445-50. PubMed ID: 23545628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Urinary Incontinence and Erectile Dysfunction After Robotic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective, Controlled, Nonrandomised Trial.
Haglind E; Carlsson S; Stranne J; Wallerstedt A; Wilderäng U; Thorsteinsdottir T; Lagerkvist M; Damber JE; Bjartell A; Hugosson J; Wiklund P; Steineck G;
Eur Urol; 2015 Aug; 68(2):216-25. PubMed ID: 25770484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Functional and oncological outcome of salvage prostatectomy of locally recurrent prostate cancer following radiation therapy].
Heidenreich A; Ohlmann C; Ozgür E; Engelmann U
Urologe A; 2006 Apr; 45(4):474-81. PubMed ID: 16465521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
