Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

384 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26092020)

  • 1. National disparities in minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.
    Gabriel E; Thirunavukarasu P; Al-Sukhni E; Attwood K; Nurkin SJ
    Surg Endosc; 2016 Mar; 30(3):1060-7. PubMed ID: 26092020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. National disparities in minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic tumors.
    Gabriel E; Thirunavukarasu P; Attwood K; Nurkin SJ
    Surg Endosc; 2017 Jan; 31(1):398-409. PubMed ID: 27412124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. National trends and disparities of minimally invasive surgery for localized renal cancer, 2010 to 2015.
    Xia L; Talwar R; Taylor BL; Shin MH; Berger IB; Sperling CD; Chelluri RR; Zambrano IA; Raman JD; Guzzo TJ
    Urol Oncol; 2019 Mar; 37(3):182.e17-182.e27. PubMed ID: 30630732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Insurance Status, Not Race, is Associated With Use of Minimally Invasive Surgical Approach for Rectal Cancer.
    Turner M; Adam MA; Sun Z; Kim J; Ezekian B; Yerokun B; Mantyh C; Migaly J
    Ann Surg; 2017 Apr; 265(4):774-781. PubMed ID: 27163956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults.
    Simon HL; Reif de Paula T; Spigel ZA; Keller DS
    J Am Geriatr Soc; 2022 Jan; 70(1):126-135. PubMed ID: 34559891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of surgical approach on short-term oncologic outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.
    Midura EF; Hanseman DJ; Hoehn RS; Davis BR; Abbott DE; Shah SA; Paquette IM
    Surgery; 2015 Aug; 158(2):453-9. PubMed ID: 25999253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Socioeconomic factors and parity of access to robotic surgery in a county health system.
    Tatebe LC; Gray R; Tatebe K; Garcia F; Putty B
    J Robot Surg; 2018 Mar; 12(1):35-41. PubMed ID: 28247092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Abdominoperineal Resections in Patients With Rectal Cancer.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z; Phelan M; Smith BR; Stamos MJ
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2015 Dec; 58(12):1123-9. PubMed ID: 26544808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Minimally invasive surgery and sphincter preservation in rectal cancer.
    Yeo HL; Abelson JS; Mao J; Cheerharan M; Milsom J; Sedrakyan A
    J Surg Res; 2016 May; 202(2):299-307. PubMed ID: 27229104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Colectomies Using a Large National Database: Outcomes and Trends Related to Surgery Center Volume.
    Yeo HL; Isaacs AJ; Abelson JS; Milsom JW; Sedrakyan A
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Jun; 59(6):535-42. PubMed ID: 27145311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Robotic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Oncologic Outcomes.
    Speicher PJ; Englum BR; Ganapathi AM; Nussbaum DP; Mantyh CR; Migaly J
    Ann Surg; 2015 Dec; 262(6):1040-5. PubMed ID: 25405559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Superior pathologic and clinical outcomes after minimally invasive rectal cancer resection, compared to open resection.
    Lee GC; Bordeianou LG; Francone TD; Blaszkowsky LS; Goldstone RN; Ricciardi R; Kunitake H; Qadan M
    Surg Endosc; 2020 Aug; 34(8):3435-3448. PubMed ID: 31844971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Payer status and access to laparoscopic subtotal colectomy for ulcerative colitis.
    Greenstein AJ; Romanoff AM; Moskowitz AJ; Sosunov EA; Khaitov S; Egorova NN
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2013 Sep; 56(9):1062-7. PubMed ID: 23929015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Hospital Type Drives Utilization and Outcomes.
    Villano AM; Zeymo A; Houlihan BK; Bayasi M; Al-Refaie WB; Chan KS
    J Surg Res; 2020 Mar; 247():180-189. PubMed ID: 31753556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predictors of Utilization and Quality Assessment in Robotic Rectal Cancer Resection: A Review of the National Cancer Database.
    Buonpane C; Efiong E; Hunsinger M; Fluck M; Shabahang M; Wild J; Halm K; Long K; Buzas C; Blansfield J
    Am Surg; 2017 Aug; 83(8):918-924. PubMed ID: 28822402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Barriers to laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: a national analysis.
    Hawkins AT; Ford MM; Benjamin Hopkins M; Muldoon RL; Wanderer JP; Parikh AA; Geiger TM
    Surg Endosc; 2018 Feb; 32(2):1035-1042. PubMed ID: 28840352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Examination of Racial Disparities in the Receipt of Minimally Invasive Surgery Among a National Cohort of Adult Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery.
    Damle RN; Flahive JM; Davids JS; Maykel JA; Sturrock PR; Alavi K
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Nov; 59(11):1055-1062. PubMed ID: 27749481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Impact of Conversion to Laparotomy in Rectal Cancer : A National Cancer Database Analysis of 57 574 Patients.
    Parascandola SA; Hota S; Tampo MMT; Sparks AD; Obias V
    Am Surg; 2020 Jul; 86(7):811-818. PubMed ID: 32683917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The Effect of Formal Robotic Residency Training on the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Surgery by Young Colorectal Surgeons.
    Disbrow DE; Pannell SM; Shanker BA; Albright J; Wu J; Bastawrous A; Soliman M; Ferraro J; Cleary RK
    J Surg Educ; 2018; 75(3):767-778. PubMed ID: 29054345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: Laparoscopic vs robotic surgery.
    Feroci F; Vannucchi A; Bianchi PP; Cantafio S; Garzi A; Formisano G; Scatizzi M
    World J Gastroenterol; 2016 Apr; 22(13):3602-10. PubMed ID: 27053852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 20.