142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22282232)
1. The case for conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.
Heit M
Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Sep; 23(9):1179-81. PubMed ID: 22282232
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for hysterectomy and pelvic organ prolapse repair.
Paraiso MF
Fertil Steril; 2014 Oct; 102(4):933-8. PubMed ID: 25274486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy.
Judd JP; Siddiqui NY; Barnett JC; Visco AG; Havrilesky LJ; Wu JM
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(4):493-9. PubMed ID: 20621010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.
Lee RK; Mottrie A; Payne CK; Waltregny D
Eur Urol; 2014 Jun; 65(6):1128-37. PubMed ID: 24433811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Robotic sacrocolpopexy: how does it compare with other prolapse repair techniques?
Linder BJ; Elliott DS
Curr Urol Rep; 2013 Jun; 14(3):235-9. PubMed ID: 23296693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Review of extraperitoneal sacrocolpopexy as a technique for advanced uterine and vault prolapse.
Onol FF; Onol SY
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Aug; 24(4):253-8. PubMed ID: 22614674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Laparoscopic and robotic sacropexy: retrospective review of learning curve experiences and follow-up.
Pilka R; Gágyor D; Študentová M; Neubert D; Dzvinčuk P
Ceska Gynekol; 2017; 82(4):261-267. PubMed ID: 28925269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. What is the role of innovative minimally invasive surgery in today's medicine?
Toglia MR
Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Sep; 23(9):1175-6. PubMed ID: 22282230
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Abdominal approaches to pelvic prolapse repairs.
Pollard ME; Eilber KS; Anger JT
Curr Opin Urol; 2013 Jul; 23(4):306-11. PubMed ID: 23673511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Are costs for robotic assisted sacrocolpopexy lower than those for open sacrocolpopexy?
Chai TC
J Urol; 2012 Feb; 187(2):644-5. PubMed ID: 22237368
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpo(recto)pexy: a cumulative sum analysis.
van Zanten F; Schraffordt Koops SE; Pasker-De Jong PCM; Lenters E; Schreuder HWR
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Nov; 221(5):483.e1-483.e11. PubMed ID: 31152711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Robotic/Laparoscopic prolapse repair and the role of hysteropexy: a urology perspective.
Burgess KL; Elliott DS
Urol Clin North Am; 2012 Aug; 39(3):349-60. PubMed ID: 22877718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
