132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21996106)
1. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial perioperative and pathologic results.
Humphreys MR; Sauer JS; Ryan AR; Leslie KO; Castle EP; Lingeman JE; Andrews PE
Urology; 2011 Dec; 78(6):1211-7. PubMed ID: 21996106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Initial experience with extraperitoneal endoscopic radical retropubic prostatectomy.
Raboy A; Ferzli G; Albert P
Urology; 1997 Dec; 50(6):849-53. PubMed ID: 9426712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic radical prostatectomy (NOTES RP): the evolution of the technique.
Humphreys MR; Castle EP; Andrews PE
Arch Esp Urol; 2012 Apr; 65(3):407-14. PubMed ID: 22495282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: radical prostatectomy in the canine model.
Krambeck AE; Humphreys MR; Andrews PE; Lingeman JE
J Endourol; 2010 Sep; 24(9):1493-6. PubMed ID: 20804436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgical radical prostatectomy: proof of concept.
Humphreys MR; Krambeck AE; Andrews PE; Castle EP; Lingeman JE
J Endourol; 2009 Apr; 23(4):669-75. PubMed ID: 19335320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Re: Humphreys et al.: natural orifice transluminal endoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial perioperative and pathologic results (urology 2011;78:1211-1218).
Jeong CW; Lee SE; Kim HH
Urology; 2012 Sep; 80(3):743-4; author reply 744-5. PubMed ID: 22925256
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Catheter-less robotic radical prostatectomy using a custom-made synchronous anastomotic splint and vesical urinary diversion device: report of the initial series and perioperative outcomes.
Tewari A; Rao S; Mandhani A
BJU Int; 2008 Sep; 102(8):1000-4. PubMed ID: 18710459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Re: Humphreys et al. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial perioperative and pathologic results (Urology 2011;78:1211-1217).
Nagathan D; Goel A; Goyal NK
Urology; 2012 Nov; 80(5):1167-8; author reply 1168. PubMed ID: 23107407
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy.
Smith JA; Chan RC; Chang SS; Herrell SD; Clark PE; Baumgartner R; Cookson MS
J Urol; 2007 Dec; 178(6):2385-9; discussion 2389-90. PubMed ID: 17936849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Early catheter removal 3 days after radical retropubic prostatectomy.
Noguchi M; Shimada A; Yahara J; Suekane S; Noda S
Int J Urol; 2004 Nov; 11(11):983-8. PubMed ID: 15509202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Morbidity of laparoscopic extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal radical prostatectomy verus open retropubic radical prostatectomy.
Remzi M; Klingler HC; Tinzl MV; Fong YK; Lodde M; Kiss B; Marberger M
Eur Urol; 2005 Jul; 48(1):83-9; discussion 89. PubMed ID: 15967256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of previous surgery on endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy.
Stolzenburg JU; Ho KM; Do M; Rabenalt R; Dorschner W; Truss MC
Urology; 2005 Feb; 65(2):325-31. PubMed ID: 15708047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The addition of robotic surgery to an established laparoscopic radical prostatectomy program: effect on positive surgical margins.
Trabulsi EJ; Linden RA; Gomella LG; McGinnis DE; Strup SE; Lallas CD
Can J Urol; 2008 Apr; 15(2):3994-9. PubMed ID: 18405448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The percent of cores positive for cancer in prostate needle biopsy specimens is strongly predictive of tumor stage and volume at radical prostatectomy.
Sebo TJ; Bock BJ; Cheville JC; Lohse C; Wollan P; Zincke H
J Urol; 2000 Jan; 163(1):174-8. PubMed ID: 10604340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical significance of benign glands at surgical margins in robotic radical prostatectomy specimens.
Kohl SK; Balaji KC; Smith LM; Wilson NP; Johansson SL; Sterrett SP; Abrahams NA
Urology; 2007 Jun; 69(6):1112-6. PubMed ID: 17572197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes after open and minimally invasive prostate cancer surgery: experience from Australasia.
Cathcart P; Murphy DG; Moon D; Costello AJ; Frydenberg M
BJU Int; 2011 Apr; 107 Suppl 3():11-9. PubMed ID: 21492370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The combined percentage of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 is the best predictor of cancer progression after radical prostatectomy.
Cheng L; Koch MO; Juliar BE; Daggy JK; Foster RS; Bihrle R; Gardner TA
J Clin Oncol; 2005 May; 23(13):2911-7. PubMed ID: 15860849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Pathological parameters of radical prostatectomy for clinical stages T1c versus T2 prostate adenocarcinoma: decreased pathological stage and increased detection of transition zone tumors.
Jack GS; Cookson MS; Coffey CS; Vader V; Roberts RL; Chang SS; Smith JA; Shappell SB
J Urol; 2002 Aug; 168(2):519-24. PubMed ID: 12131301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: transition from pure laparoscopic to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Trabulsi EJ; Zola JC; Colon-Herdman A; Heckman JE; Gomella LG; Lallas CD
Arch Esp Urol; 2011 Oct; 64(8):823-9. PubMed ID: 22052763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
