460 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25185594)
1. One-year functional and anatomic outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal extraperitoneal colpopexy with mesh.
Jambusaria LH; Murphy M; Lucente VR
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2015; 21(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 25185594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. [Mid-term efficacy of laparoscopic sacral colpopexy of combined transabdominal-transvaginal approach in the treatment of stage Ⅳ pelvic organ prolapse].
Liang XZ; Xu LZ; Chen LQ; Wang S; Lin XT; Zhang XW
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2019 Mar; 54(3):160-165. PubMed ID: 30893716
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Reoperation After Robotic and Vaginal Mesh Reconstructive Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Martin LA; Calixte R; Finamore PS
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2015; 21(6):315-8. PubMed ID: 26506158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Evaluation on clinical effectiveness of modified laparoscopic sacral colpopexy].
Zhang XW; Xu L; Li YX; Gan YP; Chen LQ
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2013 Aug; 48(8):570-4. PubMed ID: 24199920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic sacral colpopexy.
Antosh DD; Grotzke SA; McDonald MA; Shveiky D; Park AJ; Gutman RE; Sokol AI
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2012; 18(3):158-61. PubMed ID: 22543767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Anchor vs suture for the attachment of vaginal mesh in a robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a randomized clinical trial.
Berger AA; Tan-Kim J; Menefee SA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Aug; 223(2):258.e1-258.e8. PubMed ID: 32413431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Anatomic Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Supracervical Hysterectomy and Concurrent Sacrocolpopexy at a Tertiary Care Institution at Initial Adaptation of the Procedure.
Prendergast E; Silver H; Johnson LL; Simon M; Feinglass J; Kielb S; Hairston J; Lewicky-Gaupp C
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2016; 22(1):29-32. PubMed ID: 26680565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with mesh for severe pelvic organ prolapse.
Zhu L; Sun Z; Yu M; Li B; Li X; Lang J
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2013 May; 121(2):170-2. PubMed ID: 23415023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Vaginal Sacral Colpopexy: A Natural Orifice Approach to a Gold Standard Procedure.
Hanes CR
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2018 Jan; 25(1):47-52. PubMed ID: 28642090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Symptomatic and anatomic 1-year outcomes after robotic and abdominal sacrocolpopexy.
Siddiqui NY; Geller EJ; Visco AG
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2012 May; 206(5):435.e1-5. PubMed ID: 22397900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Mid term outcome of robotic mesh sacrocolpopexy.
Belsante M; Murray S; Dillon B; Zimmern P
Can J Urol; 2013 Feb; 20(1):6656-61. PubMed ID: 23433141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparing laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy surgical outcomes with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy.
Dubinskaya A; Hernandez-Aranda D; Wakefield DB; Shepherd JP
Int Urogynecol J; 2020 Feb; 31(2):401-407. PubMed ID: 31256223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study.
Gutman RE; Rardin CR; Sokol ER; Matthews C; Park AJ; Iglesia CB; Geoffrion R; Sokol AI; Karram M; Cundiff GW; Blomquist JL; Barber MD
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 216(1):38.e1-38.e11. PubMed ID: 27596620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. One-year outcome of concurrent anterior and posterior transvaginal mesh surgery for treatment of advanced urogenital prolapse: case series.
Lo TS
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(4):473-9. PubMed ID: 20547113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Laparoscopic repair of vaginal vault prolapse by lateral suspension with mesh.
Dubuisson J; Eperon I; Dällenbach P; Dubuisson JB
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2013 Feb; 287(2):307-12. PubMed ID: 23001368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
