411 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26321172)
21. Perioperative comparison of robotic assisted laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) pyeloplasty versus conventional LESS pyeloplasty.
Olweny EO; Park SK; Tan YK; Gurbuz C; Cadeddu JA; Best SL
Eur Urol; 2012 Feb; 61(2):410-4. PubMed ID: 22036645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Complications in robotic-assisted gynecologic surgery according to case type: a 6-year retrospective cohort study using Clavien-Dindo classification.
Wechter ME; Mohd J; Magrina JF; Cornella JL; Magtibay PM; Wilson JR; Kho RM
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(5):844-50. PubMed ID: 24699301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Robotic single-site versus laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a propensity score matching study.
Paek J; Lee JD; Kong TW; Chang SJ; Ryu HS
Surg Endosc; 2016 Mar; 30(3):1043-50. PubMed ID: 26092018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Robotic-assisted laparoscopy vs conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of advanced stage endometriosis.
Nezhat CR; Stevens A; Balassiano E; Soliemannjad R
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015 Jan; 22(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 24928738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Transition from multiport to single-site surgery: A single institution experience in robotic supracervical hysterectomy for benign gynecological diseases.
Chen CW; Chang HC; Huang TF; Liao CC; Huang RL; Lai HC
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Jul; 58(4):514-519. PubMed ID: 31307743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparative analysis of vaginal versus robotic-assisted hysterectomy for benign indications.
Jacome EG; Hebert AE; Christian F
J Robot Surg; 2013 Mar; 7(1):39-46. PubMed ID: 27000891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Minilaparotomy vs. laparoscopic hysterectomy: comparison of length of hospital stay.
Perron-Burdick M; Calhoun A; Idowu D; Pressman A; Zaritsky E
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(4):619-23. PubMed ID: 24469276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Laparoscopic Versus Open Hysterectomy for Benign Disease in Uteri Weighing >1 kg: A Retrospective Analysis on 258 Patients.
Uccella S; Morosi C; Marconi N; Arrigo A; Gisone B; Casarin J; Pinelli C; Borghi C; Ghezzi F
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2018 Jan; 25(1):62-69. PubMed ID: 28711761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of outcomes and cost for endometrial cancer staging via traditional laparotomy, standard laparoscopy and robotic techniques.
Bell MC; Torgerson J; Seshadri-Kreaden U; Suttle AW; Hunt S
Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Dec; 111(3):407-11. PubMed ID: 18829091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of Morcellation Techniques at the Time of Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Myomectomy.
Meurs EAIM; Brito LG; Ajao MO; Goggins ER; Vitonis AF; Einarsson JI; Cohen SL
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(5):843-849. PubMed ID: 28483536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A prospective, comparative study on robotic versus open-surgery hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for endometrial carcinoma.
Eklind S; Lindfors A; Sjöli P; Dahm-Kähler P
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2015 Feb; 25(2):250-6. PubMed ID: 25611898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: Clinical Factors that Affect Operative Times and Techniques to Overcome Difficulties.
Jeung IC; Lee YS; Song MJ; Park EK
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(4):617-625. PubMed ID: 28179197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Robotic-assisted vs traditional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a randomized controlled trial.
Mäenpää MM; Nieminen K; Tomás EI; Laurila M; Luukkaala TH; Mäenpää JU
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Nov; 215(5):588.e1-588.e7. PubMed ID: 27288987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Postoperative pain medication requirements in patients undergoing computer-assisted (“Robotic”) and standard laparoscopic procedures for newly diagnosed endometrial cancer.
Leitao MM; Malhotra V; Briscoe G; Suidan R; Dholakiya P; Santos K; Jewell EL; Brown CL; Sonoda Y; Abu-Rustum NR; Barakat RR; Gardner GJ
Ann Surg Oncol; 2013 Oct; 20(11):3561-7. PubMed ID: 23797751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer Is Associated With Reduced Morbidity and Similar Survival Outcomes Compared With Laparotomy.
Diver E; Hinchcliff E; Gockley A; Melamed A; Contrino L; Feldman S; Growdon W
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(3):402-406. PubMed ID: 28011096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy in the management of adnexal masses.
El Khouly NI; Barr RL; Kim BB; Jeng CJ; Nagarsheth NP; Fishman DA; Nezhat FR; Gretz HF; Chuang LT
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(6):1071-4. PubMed ID: 24865631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Classification of Postoperative Complications in Robotic-assisted Compared With Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer.
Barrie A; Freeman AH; Lyon L; Garcia C; Conell C; Abbott LH; Littell RD; Powell CB
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(7):1181-1188. PubMed ID: 27621195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Pilot study assessing robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy and patient outcomes.
Fiorentino RP; Zepeda MA; Goldstein BH; John CR; Rettenmaier MA
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2006; 13(1):60-3. PubMed ID: 16431325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Robotic-Assisted Gynecologic Surgery and Perioperative Morbidity in Elderly Women.
Krause AK; Muntz HG; McGonigle KF
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(6):949-53. PubMed ID: 27287246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Feasibility and surgical outcome in obese versus nonobese patients undergoing laparoendoscopic single-site hysterectomy: a multicenter case-control study.
Fanfani F; Boruta DM; Fader AN; Vizza E; Growdon WB; Kushnir CL; Corrado G; Scambia G; Turco LC; Fagotti A
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015; 22(3):456-61. PubMed ID: 25510981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
