420 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17760889)
1. Seminal vesicle-sparing perineal radical prostatectomy improves early functional results in patients with low-risk prostate cancer.
Albers P; Schäfers S; Löhmer H; de Geeter P
BJU Int; 2007 Nov; 100(5):1050-4. PubMed ID: 17760889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Is seminal vesicle ablation mandatory for all patients undergoing radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis on 1283 patients.
Zlotta AR; Roumeguère T; Ravery V; Hoffmann P; Montorsi F; Türkeri L; Dobrovrits M; Scattoni V; Ekane S; Bollens R; Vanden Bossche M; Djavan B; Boccon-Gibod L; Schulman CC;
Eur Urol; 2004 Jul; 46(1):42-9. PubMed ID: 15183546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Seminal vesicle sparing radical perineal prostatectomy].
Schäfers S; de Geeter P; Löhmer H; Albers P
Urologe A; 2009 Apr; 48(4):408-14. PubMed ID: 19145427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Stool behaviour and local pain after radical perineal and retroperitoneal prostatectomy].
Mirzapour K; de Geeter P; Löhmer H; Albers P
Aktuelle Urol; 2011 Nov; 42(6):368-73. PubMed ID: 22090372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Contemporary appraisal of radical perineal prostatectomy.
Janoff DM; Parra RO
J Urol; 2005 Jun; 173(6):1863-70. PubMed ID: 15879765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Radical retropubic vs. radical perineal prostatectomy: a comparison of relative benefits in four urban hospitals.
May M; Dorst M; May J; Hoschke B; Fahlenkamp D; Vogler H; Siegsmund M
Urol Nurs; 2007 Dec; 27(6):519-26. PubMed ID: 18217535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection, laparoscopically assisted seminal vesicle mobilization, and total perineal prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer.
Teichman JM; Reddy PK; Hulbert JC
Urology; 1995 May; 45(5):823-30. PubMed ID: 7538244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A randomized clinical trial of suspension technique for improving early recovery of urinary continence after radical retropubic prostatectomy.
Noguchi M; Kakuma T; Suekane S; Nakashima O; Mohamed ER; Matsuoka K
BJU Int; 2008 Sep; 102(8):958-63. PubMed ID: 18485031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Re: Seminal vesicle-sparing perineal radical prostatectomy improves early functional results in patients with low-risk prostate cancer.
Chabert C; Neill M; Eden C
BJU Int; 2008 Feb; 101(3):394. PubMed ID: 18184337
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Radical retropubic prostatectomy in men younger than 45 years diagnosed during early prostate cancer detection program.
Varkarakis J; Pinggera GM; Sebe P; Berger A; Bartsch G; Horninger W
Urology; 2004 Feb; 63(2):337-41. PubMed ID: 14972485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Clinical comparative evaluation of radical retropubic and perineal prostatectomy approaches for prostate cancer.
Zuo W; Hiraoka Y
Hinyokika Kiyo; 2003 Jan; 49(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 12629774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Single center comparison of anastomotic strictures after radical perineal and radical retropubic prostatectomy.
Gillitzer R; Thomas C; Wiesner C; Jones J; Schmidt F; Hampel C; Brenner W; Thüroff JW; Melchior SW
Urology; 2010 Aug; 76(2):417-22. PubMed ID: 19969328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Incidental prostate cancer at radical cystoprostatectomy: implications for apex-sparing surgery.
Gakis G; Schilling D; Bedke J; Sievert KD; Stenzl A
BJU Int; 2010 Feb; 105(4):468-71. PubMed ID: 20102366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Oncological and functional results of antegrade radical retropubic prostatectomy for the treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer.
Carini M; Masieri L; Minervini A; Lapini A; Serni S
Eur Urol; 2008 Mar; 53(3):554-61. PubMed ID: 17683854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Impact of prostate-specific antigen testing on the clinical and pathological outcomes after radical prostatectomy for Gleason 8-10 cancers.
Boorjian SA; Karnes RJ; Rangel LJ; Bergstralh EJ; Frank I; Blute ML
BJU Int; 2008 Feb; 101(3):299-304. PubMed ID: 17922854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Permanent 125I-seed brachytherapy or radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparison considering oncological and quality of life results.
Borchers H; Kirschner-Hermanns R; Brehmer B; Tietze L; Reineke T; Pinkawa M; Eble MJ; Jakse G
BJU Int; 2004 Oct; 94(6):805-11. PubMed ID: 15476513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. After radical retropubic prostatectomy 'insignificant' prostate cancer has a risk of progression similar to low-risk 'significant' cancer.
Sengupta S; Blute ML; Bagniewski SM; Inman B; Leibovich BC; Slezak JM; Myers RP; Zincke H
BJU Int; 2008 Jan; 101(2):170-4. PubMed ID: 18173824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Seminal monolateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy in selected patients.
Bellina M; Mari M; Ambu A; Guercio S; Rolle L; Tampellini M
Urol Int; 2005; 75(2):175-80. PubMed ID: 16123574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
