These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

1266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19249082)

  • 1. A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer.
    Lowe MP; Chamberlain DH; Kamelle SA; Johnson PR; Tillmanns TD
    Gynecol Oncol; 2009 May; 113(2):191-4. PubMed ID: 19249082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience.
    Ramirez PT; Slomovitz BM; Soliman PT; Coleman RL; Levenback C
    Gynecol Oncol; 2006 Aug; 102(2):252-5. PubMed ID: 16472844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Robotic radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical carcinoma: a pilot study.
    Kim YT; Kim SW; Hyung WJ; Lee SJ; Nam EJ; Lee WJ
    Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Feb; 108(2):312-6. PubMed ID: 18035405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Combined laparoscopic and vaginal radical surgery in cervical cancer.
    Renaud MC; Plante M; Roy M
    Gynecol Oncol; 2000 Oct; 79(1):59-63. PubMed ID: 11006032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of laparascopic-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy and radical abdominal hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer.
    Steed H; Rosen B; Murphy J; Laframboise S; De Petrillo D; Covens A
    Gynecol Oncol; 2004 Jun; 93(3):588-93. PubMed ID: 15196849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Safety and feasibility of robotic radical trachelectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.
    Ramirez PT; Schmeler KM; Malpica A; Soliman PT
    Gynecol Oncol; 2010 Mar; 116(3):512-5. PubMed ID: 19944451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Minimally invasive comprehensive surgical staging for endometrial cancer: Robotics or laparoscopy?
    Seamon LG; Cohn DE; Henretta MS; Kim KH; Carlson MJ; Phillips GS; Fowler JM
    Gynecol Oncol; 2009 Apr; 113(1):36-41. PubMed ID: 19168206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (type II-III) with pelvic lymphadenectomy in early invasive cervical cancer.
    Gil-Moreno A; Puig O; Pérez-Benavente MA; Díaz B; Vergés R; De la Torre J; Martínez-Palones JM; Xercavins J
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2005; 12(2):113-20. PubMed ID: 15904613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The outcome of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer: a prospective analysis of 295 patients.
    Chen Y; Xu H; Li Y; Wang D; Li J; Yuan J; Liang Z
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2008 Oct; 15(10):2847-55. PubMed ID: 18649105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.
    Bell MC; Torgerson J; Seshadri-Kreaden U; Suttle AW; Hunt S
    Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Dec; 111(3):407-11. PubMed ID: 18829091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical-pathologic and morbidity analyses of Types 2 and 3 abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.
    Pikaart DP; Holloway RW; Ahmad S; Finkler NJ; Bigsby GE; Ortiz BH; Denardis SA
    Gynecol Oncol; 2007 Nov; 107(2):205-10. PubMed ID: 17692367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical carcinoma patients, comparing results with total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy cases. The future is now?
    Sert B; Abeler V
    Int J Med Robot; 2007 Sep; 3(3):224-8. PubMed ID: 17924449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution.
    Ko EM; Muto MG; Berkowitz RS; Feltmate CM
    Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Dec; 111(3):425-30. PubMed ID: 18929400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Survival outcomes for women undergoing type III robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a 3-year experience.
    Cantrell LA; Mendivil A; Gehrig PA; Boggess JF
    Gynecol Oncol; 2010 May; 117(2):260-5. PubMed ID: 20153886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Robotic radical hysterectomy.
    Fanning J; Fenton B; Purohit M
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Jun; 198(6):649.e1-4. PubMed ID: 18538146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Robotics versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy in patients with early cervical cancer: a multicenter study.
    Tinelli R; Malzoni M; Cosentino F; Perone C; Fusco A; Cicinelli E; Nezhat F
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2011 Sep; 18(9):2622-8. PubMed ID: 21394663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with Ib1 stage cervical cancer: analysis of surgical and oncological outcome.
    Pellegrino A; Vizza E; Fruscio R; Villa A; Corrado G; Villa M; Dell'Anna T; Vitobello D
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2009 Jan; 35(1):98-103. PubMed ID: 18760562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Abdominal radical trachelectomy for invasive cervical cancer: a case series and literature review.
    Pareja F R; Ramirez PT; Borrero F M; Angel C G
    Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Dec; 111(3):555-60. PubMed ID: 18829092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Laparoscopic total radical hysterectomy by the Pune technique: our experience of 248 cases.
    Puntambekar SP; Palep RJ; Puntambekar SS; Wagh GN; Patil AM; Rayate NV; Agarwal GA
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2007; 14(6):682-9. PubMed ID: 17980327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Robotic radical hysterectomy: comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy.
    Magrina JF; Kho RM; Weaver AL; Montero RP; Magtibay PM
    Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Apr; 109(1):86-91. PubMed ID: 18279944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 64.