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.
182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21858540)
1. Prospective comparison of short-term functional outcomes obtained after pure laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Seror J; Yates DR; Seringe E; Vaessen C; Bitker MO; Chartier-Kastler E; Rouprêt M World J Urol; 2012 Jun; 30(3):393-8. PubMed ID: 21858540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Therapeutic effect of robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Yin H; Zeng F; Xue M; Tian X Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2020 Jun; 45(6):709-714. PubMed ID: 32879129 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of functional outcomes with purely laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy in obese women. Joubert M; Thubert T; Lefranc JP; Vaessen C; Chartier-Kastler É; Deffieux X; Rouprêt M Prog Urol; 2014 Dec; 24(17):1106-13. PubMed ID: 25450756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Results obtained after robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacral colpopexy for the management of urogenital prolapse: a review]. Seisen T; Vaessen C; Yates DR; Parra J; Bourgade V; Bitker MO; Chartier-Kastler E; Rouprêt M Prog Urol; 2012 Mar; 22(3):146-53. PubMed ID: 22364624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Short-term Outcomes of Non-robotic Single-incision Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: A Surgical Technique. Liu J; Kohn J; Wu C; Guan Z; Guan X J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020; 27(3):721-727. PubMed ID: 31146027 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Robot-assisted Vs Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy for High-stage Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-center Study. Illiano E; Ditonno P; Giannitsas K; De Rienzo G; Bini V; Costantini E Urology; 2019 Dec; 134():116-123. PubMed ID: 31563536 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site compared with robotic multi-port sacrocolpopexy for apical compartment prolapse. Matanes E; Boulus S; Lauterbach R; Amit A; Weiner Z; Lowenstein L Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Apr; 222(4):358.e1-358.e11. PubMed ID: 31589864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Complications and clinical outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse. Sato H; Abe H; Ikeda A; Miyagawa T; Sato K J Obstet Gynaecol; 2021 Jan; 41(1):128-132. PubMed ID: 32148120 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Safety and efficacy of spider anchoring device for apical repair in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: Retrospective cohort study. Braun NM; Andraos W; Bettin S Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2019 Apr; 235():88-92. PubMed ID: 30851636 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prospective study of an ultra-lightweight polypropylene Y mesh for robotic sacrocolpopexy. Salamon CG; Lewis C; Priestley J; Gurshumov E; Culligan PJ Int Urogynecol J; 2013 Aug; 24(8):1371-5. PubMed ID: 23296684 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Sacrocolpopexy: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Costantini E; Mearini L; Lazzeri M; Bini V; Nunzi E; di Biase M; Porena M J Urol; 2016 Jul; 196(1):159-65. PubMed ID: 26780167 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: operative times and efficiency in a high-volume female pelvic medicine and laparoscopic surgery practice. Moore R; Moriarty C; Chinthakanan O; Miklos J Int Urogynecol J; 2017 Jun; 28(6):887-892. PubMed ID: 27766346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with bone anchor fixation: short-term anatomic and functional results. Withagen MI; Vierhout ME; Mannaerts GH; van der Weiden RM Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Apr; 23(4):481-6. PubMed ID: 22086264 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Robotic sacrocolpopexy for the management of pelvic organ prolapse: a review of midterm surgical and quality of life outcomes. Barboglio PG; Toler AJ; Triaca V Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2014; 20(1):38-43. PubMed ID: 24368487 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Tension-free vaginal mesh surgery versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: Analysis of perioperative outcomes using a Japanese national inpatient database. Obinata D; Sugihara T; Yasunaga H; Mochida J; Yamaguchi K; Murata Y; Yoshizawa T; Matsui T; Matsui H; Sasabuchi Y; Fujimura T; Homma Y; Takahashi S Int J Urol; 2018 Jul; 25(7):655-659. PubMed ID: 29729035 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse using robot assisted laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy: quality of life and technique. Mourik SL; Martens JE; Aktas M Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2012 Nov; 165(1):122-7. PubMed ID: 22897838 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Perioperative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy Based on Route of Concurrent Hysterectomy: A Secondary Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database. Cardenas-Trowers O; Stewart JR; Meriwether KV; Francis SL; Gupta A J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020; 27(4):953-958. PubMed ID: 31404710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Pan K; Zhang Y; Wang Y; Wang Y; Xu H Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 Mar; 132(3):284-91. PubMed ID: 26797199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Long-term outcomes of modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for advanced pelvic organ prolapse: a 3-year prospective study. Liang S; Zhu L; Song X; Xu T; Sun Z; Lang J Menopause; 2016 Jul; 23(7):765-70. PubMed ID: 27138745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A randomised controlled trial of abdominal versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: LAS study. Freeman RM; Pantazis K; Thomson A; Frappell J; Bombieri L; Moran P; Slack M; Scott P; Waterfield M Int Urogynecol J; 2013 Mar; 24(3):377-84. PubMed ID: 22864764 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]