153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24462854)
1. Trends in the national distribution of laparoscopic hysterectomies from 2003 to 2010.
Lee J; Jennings K; Borahay MA; Rodriguez AM; Kilic GS; Snyder RR; Patel PR
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(4):656-61. PubMed ID: 24462854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Socioeconomic and racial predictors of undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy for selected benign diseases: analysis of 341487 hysterectomies.
Abenhaim HA; Azziz R; Hu J; Bartolucci A; Tulandi T
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2008; 15(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 18262137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Disparities in use of laparoscopic hysterectomies: a nationwide analysis.
Patel PR; Lee J; Rodriguez AM; Borahay MA; Snyder RR; Hankins GD; Kilic GS
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(2):223-7. PubMed ID: 24012920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Social determinants of access to minimally invasive hysterectomy: reevaluating the relationship between race and route of hysterectomy for benign disease.
Price JT; Zimmerman LD; Koelper NC; Sammel MD; Lee S; Butts SF
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 217(5):572.e1-572.e10. PubMed ID: 28784416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Inpatient Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in the United States: Trends and Factors Associated With Approach Selection.
Desai VB; Guo XM; Fan L; Wright JD; Xu X
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):151-158.e1. PubMed ID: 27614151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Trends in various types of surgery for hysterectomy and distribution by patient age, surgeon age, and hospital accreditation: 10-year population-based study in Taiwan.
Wu MP; Huang KH; Long CY; Tsai EM; Tang CH
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(5):612-9. PubMed ID: 20656565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches.
Jacoby VL; Autry A; Jacobson G; Domush R; Nakagawa S; Jacoby A
Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Nov; 114(5):1041-1048. PubMed ID: 20168105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Practice patterns and postoperative complications before and after US Food and Drug Administration safety communication on power morcellation.
Harris JA; Swenson CW; Uppal S; Kamdar N; Mahnert N; As-Sanie S; Morgan DM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jan; 214(1):98.e1-98.e13. PubMed ID: 26314519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Nationwide trends in the utilization of and payments for hysterectomy in the United States among commercially insured women.
Morgan DM; Kamdar NS; Swenson CW; Kobernik EK; Sammarco AG; Nallamothu B
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Apr; 218(4):425.e1-425.e18. PubMed ID: 29288067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Updated hysterectomy surveillance and factors associated with minimally invasive hysterectomy.
Cohen SL; Vitonis AF; Einarsson JI
JSLS; 2014; 18(3):. PubMed ID: 25392662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications.
Mehta A; Xu T; Hutfless S; Makary MA; Sinno AK; Tanner EJ; Stone RL; Wang K; Fader AN
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 May; 216(5):497.e1-497.e10. PubMed ID: 28034651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Change in Surgical Practice for Women With Leiomyomas After the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Morcellator Safety Communication.
Clark NM; Schembri M; Jacoby VL
Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 130(5):1057-1063. PubMed ID: 29016511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Associations Between Social Risk Factors and Surgical Site Infections After Colectomy and Abdominal Hysterectomy.
Qi AC; Peacock K; Luke AA; Barker A; Olsen MA; Joynt Maddox KE
JAMA Netw Open; 2019 Oct; 2(10):e1912339. PubMed ID: 31577353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Surgical Trends and Time Frame Comparison of Surgical Types of Hysterectomy: A Nationwide, Population-based 15-year Study.
Huang CC; Lo TS; Huang YT; Long CY; Law KS; Wu MP
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020 Jan; 27(1):65-73.e1. PubMed ID: 30928611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Hysterectomies in Portugal (2000-2014): What has changed?
Gante I; Medeiros-Borges C; Águas F
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2017 Jan; 208():97-102. PubMed ID: 27914240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of robotic surgery on hysterectomy trends: implications for resident education.
Yamasato K; Casey D; Kaneshiro B; Hiraoka M
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(3):399-405. PubMed ID: 24172026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of 30-day Complication Rates between Laparoscopic Myomectomy and Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Uterine Leiomyoma in Women Older Than Age 40.
Sheyn D; Bretschnieder CE; Mahajan ST; El-Nashar S; Billow M; Ninivaggio CS
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2019; 26(6):1076-1082. PubMed ID: 30385429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Temporal trend and nationwide utility for hysterectomies in Taiwan, 1997-2010.
Huang WY; Huang KH; Chang WC; Wu SC
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Oct; 55(5):659-665. PubMed ID: 27751412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Factors associated with undergoing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy for benign conditions.
Jacoby VL; Vittinghoff E; Nakagawa S; Jackson R; Richter HE; Chan J; Kuppermann M
Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Jun; 113(6):1259-1267. PubMed ID: 19461420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Laparoscopic and Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy for Uterine Leiomyomas: A Comparison of Complications and Costs.
Ngan TYT; Zakhari A; Czuzoj-Shulman N; Tulandi T; Abenhaim HA
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2018 Apr; 40(4):432-439. PubMed ID: 29032064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
