324 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25231240)
1. Hysteropexy in the treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial comparing laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy with vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (LAVA-trial, study protocol).
van IJsselmuiden MN; Coolen AL; Detollenaere RJ; den Boon J; Bongers M; van de Pol G; Vollebregt A; Radder CM; Deprest J; van Eijndhoven HW
BMC Womens Health; 2014 Sep; 14():112. PubMed ID: 25231240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study).
Schulten SFM; Enklaar RA; Kluivers KB; van Leijsen SAL; Jansen-van der Weide MC; Adang EMM; van Bavel J; van Dongen H; Gerritse MBE; van Gestel I; Malmberg GGA; Mouw RJC; van Rumpt-van de Geest DA; Spaans WA; van der Steen A; Stekelenburg J; Tiersma ESM; Verkleij-Hagoort AC; Vollebregt A; Wingen CBM; Weemhoff M; van Eijndhoven HWF
BMC Womens Health; 2019 Apr; 19(1):49. PubMed ID: 30940171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: a randomized multicenter trial comparing sacrospinous fixation with vaginal hysterectomy (SAVE U trial).
Detollenaere RJ; den Boon J; Stekelenburg J; Alhafidh AH; Hakvoort RA; Vierhout ME; van Eijndhoven HW
BMC Womens Health; 2011 Feb; 11():4. PubMed ID: 21324143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial.
Detollenaere RJ; den Boon J; Stekelenburg J; IntHout J; Vierhout ME; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HW
BMJ; 2015 Jul; 351():h3717. PubMed ID: 26206451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Hysteropexy in the treatment of uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus sacrospinous hysteropexy-a multicentre randomised controlled trial (LAVA trial).
van IJsselmuiden MN; van Oudheusden A; Veen J; van de Pol G; Vollebregt A; Radder CM; Housmans S; van Kuijk S; Deprest J; Bongers MY; van Eijndhoven H
BJOG; 2020 Sep; 127(10):1284-1293. PubMed ID: 32267624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial.
Schulten SFM; Detollenaere RJ; Stekelenburg J; IntHout J; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HWF
BMJ; 2019 Sep; 366():l5149. PubMed ID: 31506252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Impact of Sacrospinous Hysteropexy and Vaginal Hysterectomy With Suspension of the Uterosacral Ligaments on Sexual Function in Women With Uterine Prolapse: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Comparative Study.
Detollenaere RJ; Kreuwel IA; Dijkstra JR; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HW
J Sex Med; 2016 Feb; 13(2):213-9. PubMed ID: 26805940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse, a randomized controlled trial: SALTO-2 trial, study protocol.
Coolen AWM; van IJsselmuiden MN; van Oudheusden AMJ; Veen J; van Eijndhoven HWF; Mol BWJ; Roovers JP; Bongers MY
BMC Womens Health; 2017 Jul; 17(1):52. PubMed ID: 28747206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Li C; Dai Z; Shu H
Trials; 2018 Mar; 19(1):160. PubMed ID: 29506566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension on treatment failure in women with uterovaginal prolapse: 5-year results of a randomized clinical trial.
Nager CW; Visco AG; Richter HE; Rardin CR; Komesu Y; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Paraiso MFR; Mazloomdoost D; Sridhar A; Thomas S;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Aug; 225(2):153.e1-153.e31. PubMed ID: 33716071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Characteristics associated with composite surgical failure over 5 years of women in a randomized trial of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.
Richter HE; Sridhar A; Nager CW; Komesu YM; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Rardin C; Visco A; Mazloomdoost D; Thomas S;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Jan; 228(1):63.e1-63.e16. PubMed ID: 35931131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of Vaginal Mesh Hysteropexy vs Vaginal Hysterectomy With Uterosacral Ligament Suspension on Treatment Failure in Women With Uterovaginal Prolapse: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Nager CW; Visco AG; Richter HE; Rardin CR; Rogers RG; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Paraiso MFR; Mazloomdoost D; Grey S; Sridhar A; Wallace D;
JAMA; 2019 Sep; 322(11):1054-1065. PubMed ID: 31529008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Manchester Procedure vs Sacrospinous Hysteropexy for Treatment of Uterine Descent: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Enklaar RA; Schulten SFM; van Eijndhoven HWF; Weemhoff M; van Leijsen SAL; van der Weide MC; van Bavel J; Verkleij-Hagoort AC; Adang EMM; Kluivers KB;
JAMA; 2023 Aug; 330(7):626-635. PubMed ID: 37581670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy as treatment for uterine descent: comparison of long-term outcomes.
van Oudheusden AMJ; Coolen AWM; Hoskam H; Veen J; Bongers MY
Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Jan; 34(1):211-223. PubMed ID: 35482083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does the uterus need to be removed to correct uterovaginal prolapse?
Gutman RE
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Oct; 28(5):435-40. PubMed ID: 27467823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Success rates and outcomes of laparoscopic mesh sacrohysteropexy.
Daniels S; Robson D; Palacz M; Howell S; Nguyen T; Behnia-Willison F
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2020 Apr; 60(2):244-249. PubMed ID: 31840811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Combined sacrospinous hysteropexy and cystopexy using a single anterior incision.
Petruzzelli P; Chiadò Fiorio Tin M; Cosma S; Parisi S; Garofalo A; Todros T
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 Oct; 135(1):101-6. PubMed ID: 27352736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.
Schulten SF; Detollenaere RJ; IntHout J; Kluivers KB; Van Eijndhoven HW
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Aug; 227(2):252.e1-252.e9. PubMed ID: 35439530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Hysteropexy: Evidence and Insights.
Ridgeway BM; Cadish L
Clin Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jun; 60(2):312-323. PubMed ID: 28263199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
