113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18947800)
1. Comparison of traditional enterocystoplasty and seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium.
Bandi G; Al-Omar O; McLorie GA
J Pediatr Urol; 2007 Dec; 3(6):484-9. PubMed ID: 18947800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Determinants of success and failure of seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium.
González R; Ludwikowski B; Horst M
J Urol; 2009 Oct; 182(4 Suppl):1781-4. PubMed ID: 19692035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prerequisite for successful surgical outcome in urothelium lined seromuscular colocystoplasty.
Jung HJ; Lee H; Im YJ; Lee YS; Hong CH; Han SW
J Urol; 2012 Apr; 187(4):1416-21. PubMed ID: 22341808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Surgical complications of bladder augmentation: comparison between various enterocystoplasties in 133 patients.
Shekarriz B; Upadhyay J; Demirbilek S; Barthold JS; González R
Urology; 2000 Jan; 55(1):123-8. PubMed ID: 10654908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Further experience with seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium.
Jednak R; Schimke CM; Barroso U JR; Barthold JS; González R
J Urol; 2000 Dec; 164(6):2045-9. PubMed ID: 11061922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Histological findings after colocystoplasty and gastrocystoplasty.
Vajda P; Kaiser L; Magyarlaki T; Farkas A; Vastyan AM; Pinter AB
J Urol; 2002 Aug; 168(2):698-701; discussion 701. PubMed ID: 12131353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium: experimental study.
Buson H; Manivel JC; Dayanç M; Long R; Gonzalez R
Urology; 1994 Nov; 44(5):743-8. PubMed ID: 7974949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Bladder augmentation and/or continent urinary diversion: 10-year experience.
Daher P; Zeidan S; Riachy E; Iskandarani F
Eur J Pediatr Surg; 2007 Apr; 17(2):119-23. PubMed ID: 17503306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined by urothelium. Experimental study in rats].
Blanco Bruned JL; Alvarez Díaz JF; Sáez López A; Oliver Llinares F; Prado Fernández C; González Landa G
Cir Pediatr; 2001 Oct; 14(4):162-7. PubMed ID: 12601965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surgical outcomes of bladder augmentation: A comparison of three different augmentation procedures.
Sun XG; Wang RY; Xu JL; Li DG; Chen WX; Li JL; Wang J; Li AW
World J Clin Cases; 2020 Aug; 8(15):3240-3248. PubMed ID: 32874978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Long-term risks of bladder augmentation in pediatric patients.
Austin JC
Curr Opin Urol; 2008 Jul; 18(4):408-12. PubMed ID: 18520764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Distal shunt obstruction in children with myelomeningocele after bladder perforation.
Barker GM; Läckgren G; Stenberg A; Arnell K
J Urol; 2006 Oct; 176(4 Pt 2):1726-8; discussion 1728. PubMed ID: 16945632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of augmentation cystoplasty on bladder contractility in rabbits.
Ozkan-Ulu H; Ulu N; Bingol-Kologlu M; Onur R; Aktug T
J Pediatr Surg; 2008 Jul; 43(7):1347-52. PubMed ID: 18639694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium: experience with 16 patients.
Gonzalez R; Buson H; Reid C; Reinberg Y
Urology; 1995 Jan; 45(1):124-9. PubMed ID: 7817464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Bladder neck transection for intractable pediatric urinary incontinence.
Novak TE; Salmasi AH; Lakshmanan Y; Mathews RI; Gearhart JP
J Urol; 2009 Jan; 181(1):310-4; discussion 314. PubMed ID: 19013617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. What is the need for additional bladder surgery after bladder augmentation in childhood?
Metcalfe PD; Cain MP; Kaefer M; Gilley DA; Meldrum KK; Misseri R; King SJ; Casale AJ; Rink RC
J Urol; 2006 Oct; 176(4 Pt 2):1801-5; discussion 1805. PubMed ID: 16945653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Seromuscular colocystoplasty lined with urothelium protects dogs from acidosis during ammonium chloride loading.
Denes ED; Vates TS; Freedman AL; González R
J Urol; 1997 Sep; 158(3 Pt 2):1075-80. PubMed ID: 9258145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of type of conduit and site of implantation on the outcome of continent catheterizable channels.
Piaggio L; Myers S; Figueroa TE; Barthold JS; González R
J Pediatr Urol; 2007 Jun; 3(3):230-4. PubMed ID: 18947741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effectiveness of implanting catheterizable channels into intestinal segments.
Franc-Guimond J; González R
J Pediatr Urol; 2006 Feb; 2(1):31-3. PubMed ID: 18947591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A therapeutic method for failed bladder augmentation in children: re-augmentation.
Vajda P; Buyukunal CS; Soylet Y; Danismed N; Juhasz Z; Pinter AB
BJU Int; 2006 Apr; 97(4):816-9, discussion 819. PubMed ID: 16536781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
