275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26516818)
1. Uterine Conservation During Prolapse Repair: 9-Year Experience at a Single Institution.
Kow N; Goldman HB; Ridgeway B
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2016; 22(3):126-31. PubMed ID: 26516818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Uterine preservation for advanced pelvic organ prolapse repair: Anatomical results and patient satisfaction.
Fink K; Shachar IB; Braun NM
Int Braz J Urol; 2016; 42(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 27564289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review.
Tolstrup CK; Lose G; Klarskov N
Int Urogynecol J; 2017 Jan; 28(1):33-40. PubMed ID: 27485234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after pregnancy following uterine-sparing prolapse repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Andebrhan SB; Caron AT; Szlachta-McGinn A; Parameshwar PS; Jackson NJ; Rosenman AE; Anger JT; Ackerman AL
Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Feb; 34(2):345-356. PubMed ID: 35920935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of patient reported outcomes, pelvic floor function and recurrence after laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with McCall suspension for advanced uterine prolapse.
Şükür YE; Dökmeci F; Çetinkaya ŞE; Seval MM
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 Apr; 247():127-131. PubMed ID: 32092668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Does prolapse equal hysterectomy? The role of uterine conservation in women with uterovaginal prolapse.
Ridgeway BM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Dec; 213(6):802-9. PubMed ID: 26226554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Laparoscopic sacral uteropexy with cravat technique--experience and results.
Api M; Kayatas S; Boza A; Nazik H; Aytan H
Int Braz J Urol; 2014; 40(4):526-32. PubMed ID: 25251957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Uterine sparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy for pelvic organ prolapse: safety and feasibility.
Lee T; Rosenblum N; Nitti V; Brucker BM
J Endourol; 2013 Sep; 27(9):1131-6. PubMed ID: 23713544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Vaginal reconstructive surgery for severe pelvic organ prolapses: a 'uterine-sparing' technique using polypropylene prostheses.
De Vita D; Araco F; Gravante G; Sesti F; Piccione E
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2008 Aug; 139(2):245-51. PubMed ID: 18321633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Efficacy and pregnancy outcomes of laparoscopic single sheet mesh sacrohysteropexy.
Pandeva I; Mistry M; Fayyad A
Neurourol Urodyn; 2017 Mar; 36(3):787-793. PubMed ID: 27224927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Safety and one year outcomes following vaginally assisted laparoscopic uterine sacropexy (VALUES) for advanced uterine prolapse.
Fayyad AM; Siozos CS
Neurourol Urodyn; 2014 Mar; 33(3):345-9. PubMed ID: 23729356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pectineal Ligament Hysteropexy for Uterine Prolapse in Premenopausal Women by Open and Laparoscopic Approach in Indian Urban and Rural Centers.
Joshi VM; Otiv SR; Dagade VB; Borse M; Majumder RN; Shrivastava M; Shelmohkar R; Bijwe S
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2015; 21(4):215-9. PubMed ID: 25798546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Uterus Preserving Prolapse Repair: How Long does it Last?
Illiano E; Zucchi A; Giannitsas K; Carbone A; Pastore AL; Costantini E
Urol Int; 2019; 102(3):319-325. PubMed ID: 30673681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Sacrohysteropexy: A Way to Spare the Uterus.
Labanca L; Centini G; Lazzeri L; Afors K; Argay IM; Habib N; Zupi E
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020; 27(6):1254-1255. PubMed ID: 31838275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Comparison outcomes of three surgical procedures in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse and analysis of risk factors for genital prolapse recurrence].
Hu CD; Chen YS; Yi XF; Ding JX; Feng WW; Yao LQ; Huang J; Zhang Y; Hu WG; Zhu ZL; Hua KQ
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2011 Feb; 46(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 21426765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Positive symptom improvement with laparoscopic uterosacral ligament repair for uterine or vaginal vault prolapse: interim results from an active multicenter trial.
Schwartz M; Abbott KR; Glazerman L; Sobolewski C; Jarnagin B; Ailawadi R; Lucente V
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2007; 14(5):570-6. PubMed ID: 17848317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension combined with cervical amputation in treatment of women severe uterine prolapsed at child-bearing period].
Sun Z; Zhu L; Hu H; Lang J; Shi H; Gong X
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2014 Mar; 49(3):167-71. PubMed ID: 24820298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
