These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25366305)
1. Differences in recurrent prolapse at 1 year after total vs supracervical hysterectomy and robotic sacrocolpopexy. Myers EM; Siff L; Osmundsen B; Geller E; Matthews CA Int Urogynecol J; 2015 Apr; 26(4):585-9. PubMed ID: 25366305 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Vaginal versus robotic hysterectomy and concomitant pelvic support surgery: a comparison of postoperative vaginal length and sexual function. De La Cruz JF; Myers EM; Geller EJ J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(6):1010-4. PubMed ID: 24780383 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Route of hysterectomy during minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy does not affect postoperative outcomes. Davidson ERW; Thomas TN; Lampert EJ; Paraiso MFR; Ferrando CA Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Apr; 30(4):649-655. PubMed ID: 30338370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Short-term mesh exposure after robotic sacrocolpopexy with and without concomitant hysterectomy. Crane AK; Geller EJ; Sullivan S; Robinson BL; Myers EM; Horton C; Matthews CA South Med J; 2014 Oct; 107(10):603-6. PubMed ID: 25279861 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Prolapse and mesh reoperations following sacrocolpopexy: comparing supracervical hysterectomy, total hysterectomy, and no hysterectomy. Kikuchi JY; Yanek LR; Handa VL; Chen CCG; Jacobs S; Blomquist J; Patterson D Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Jan; 34(1):135-145. PubMed ID: 35689689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy--standardized surgical technique, perioperative management and outcome in women with posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Huebner M; Krzonkalla M; Tunn R Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2009; 49(4):308-14. PubMed ID: 20530946 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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. Total Vaginal Hysterectomy With Uterosacral Ligament Suspension Compared With Supracervical Hysterectomy With Sacrocervicopexy for Uterovaginal Prolapse. Giugale LE; Melnyk AI; Ruppert KM; Napoe GS; Lavelle ES; Bradley MS Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Sep; 138(3):435-442. PubMed ID: 34352830 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Pelvic floor function before and after robotic sacrocolpopexy: one-year outcomes. Geller EJ; Parnell BA; Dunivan GC J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2011; 18(3):322-7. PubMed ID: 21458389 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Pan K; Cao L; Ryan NA; Wang Y; Xu H Int Urogynecol J; 2016 Jan; 27(1):93-101. PubMed ID: 26179552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concomitant supracervical hysterectomy or uterine preservation. Sato H; Otsuka S; Abe H; Tsukada S Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Sep; 34(9):2217-2224. PubMed ID: 37052646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Risk of postoperative mesh exposure following sacrocolpopexy with supracervical versus total concomitant laparoscopic hysterectomy. Glass Clark S; Bretschneider CE; Bradley MS; Rhodes S; Shoag J; Sheyn D Int Urogynecol J; 2024 Jan; 35(1):207-213. PubMed ID: 38060029 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]