394 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18710777)
1. A comparison of open vs laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty using the pediatric health information system database--do benefits of laparoscopic approach recede at younger ages?
Tanaka ST; Grantham JA; Thomas JC; Adams MC; Brock JW; Pope JC
J Urol; 2008 Oct; 180(4):1479-85. PubMed ID: 18710777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Surgical management of congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a Pediatric Health Information System database study.
Vemulakonda VM; Cowan CA; Lendvay TS; Joyner BD; Grady RW
J Urol; 2008 Oct; 180(4 Suppl):1689-92; discussion 1692. PubMed ID: 18708209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants and children: comparison with open surgery.
Piaggio LA; Franc-Guimond J; Noh PH; Wehry M; Figueroa TE; Barthold J; González R
J Urol; 2007 Oct; 178(4 Pt 2):1579-83. PubMed ID: 17707047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Our experience with retroperitoneal and transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction.
Davenport K; Minervini A; Timoney AG; Keeley FX
Eur Urol; 2005 Dec; 48(6):973-7. PubMed ID: 16171940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Which is better--retroperitoneoscopic or laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children?
Canon SJ; Jayanthi VR; Lowe GJ
J Urol; 2007 Oct; 178(4 Pt 2):1791-5; discussion 1795. PubMed ID: 17707427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Minimally invasive open renal surgery.
Chacko JK; Koyle MA; Mingin GC; Furness PD
J Urol; 2007 Oct; 178(4 Pt 2):1575-7; discussion 1577-8. PubMed ID: 17707048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ghosts in the machine: a multi-institutional comparison of laparoscopic and open pyloromyotomy.
Campbell BT; McVay MR; Lerer TJ; Lowe NJ; Smith SD; Kokoska ER
J Pediatr Surg; 2007 Dec; 42(12):2026-9. PubMed ID: 18082701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children.
Bonnard A; Fouquet V; Carricaburu E; Aigrain Y; El-Ghoneimi A
J Urol; 2005 May; 173(5):1710-3; discussion 1713. PubMed ID: 15821565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Laparoscopic versus open pyeloplasty in children: preliminary report of a prospective randomized trial.
Penn HA; Gatti JM; Hoestje SM; DeMarco RT; Snyder CL; Murphy JP
J Urol; 2010 Aug; 184(2):690-5. PubMed ID: 20639039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Risk factors for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction after open pyeloplasty in a large pediatric cohort.
Braga LH; Lorenzo AJ; Bägli DJ; Keays M; Farhat WA; Khoury AE; Salle JL
J Urol; 2008 Oct; 180(4 Suppl):1684-7; discussion 1687-8. PubMed ID: 18708226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children: long-term outcome.
Ansari MS; Mandhani A; Singh P; Srivastava A; Kumar A; Kapoor R
Int J Urol; 2008 Oct; 15(10):881-4. PubMed ID: 18775033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty in children younger than 2 years.
Cascio S; Tien A; Chee W; Tan HL
J Urol; 2007 Jan; 177(1):335-8. PubMed ID: 17162086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the infant younger than 6 months--is it technically possible?
Kutikov A; Resnick M; Casale P
J Urol; 2006 Apr; 175(4):1477-9; discussion 1479. PubMed ID: 16516026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Pediatric robot assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty: comparison with a cohort of open surgery.
Lee RS; Retik AB; Borer JG; Peters CA
J Urol; 2006 Feb; 175(2):683-7; discussion 687. PubMed ID: 16407025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Population-based comparison of laparoscopic and open pyeloplasty in paediatric pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction.
Knoedler J; Han L; Granberg C; Kramer S; Chow G; Gettman M; Kimball B; Moriarty J; Kim S; Husmann D
BJU Int; 2013 Jun; 111(7):1141-7. PubMed ID: 23510261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Retrospective comparison of retroperitoneal laparoscopic versus open dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Zhang X; Li HZ; Ma X; Zheng T; Lang B; Zhang J; Fu B; Xu K; Guo XL
J Urol; 2006 Sep; 176(3):1077-80. PubMed ID: 16890694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Parental satisfaction after open versus robot assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty: results from modified Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory Survey.
Freilich DA; Penna FJ; Nelson CP; Retik AB; Nguyen HT
J Urol; 2010 Feb; 183(2):704-8. PubMed ID: 20022046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Long-term follow-up for salvage laparoscopic pyeloplasty after failed open pyeloplasty.
Shapiro EY; Cho JS; Srinivasan A; Seideman CA; Huckabay CP; Andonian S; Lee BR; Richstone L; Kavoussi LR
Urology; 2009 Jan; 73(1):115-8. PubMed ID: 18950836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Open vs laparoscopic repair of congenital duodenal obstructions: a concurrent series.
Spilde TL; St Peter SD; Keckler SJ; Holcomb GW; Snyder CL; Ostlie DJ
J Pediatr Surg; 2008 Jun; 43(6):1002-5. PubMed ID: 18558173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Nondismembered pyeloplasty in a pediatric population: results of 34 open and laparoscopic procedures.
Polok M; Chrzan R; Veenboer P; Beyerlein S; Dik P; Klijn A; Kuijper C; de Jong T
Urology; 2011 Oct; 78(4):891-4. PubMed ID: 21705049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
