157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26539008)
1. Is Radical Perineal Prostatectomy a Viable Therapeutic Option for Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer?
Lee HW; Jeon HG; Jeong BC; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Lee HM; Choi HY
J Korean Med Sci; 2015 Nov; 30(11):1631-7. PubMed ID: 26539008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes and Complications According to Surgical Approach to Radical Prostatectomy: Special Focus on the Perineal Approach.
Song W; Park JH; Jeon HG; Jeong BC; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Lee HM; Choi HY
Clin Genitourin Cancer; 2017 Aug; 15(4):e645-e652. PubMed ID: 28216277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Contemporaneous comparison of open vs minimally-invasive radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer.
Pierorazio PM; Mullins JK; Eifler JB; Voth K; Hyams ES; Han M; Pavlovich CP; Bivalacqua TJ; Partin AW; Allaf ME; Schaeffer EM
BJU Int; 2013 Oct; 112(6):751-7. PubMed ID: 23356390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A multi-institutional comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for treatment of localized prostate cancer.
Coronato EE; Harmon JD; Ginsberg PC; Harkaway RC; Singh K; Braitman L; Sloane BB; Jaffe JS
J Robot Surg; 2009 Oct; 3(3):175. PubMed ID: 27638375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of oncological, surgical, and functional outcomes between radical retropubic and radical perineal prostatectomy: A multi-institutional study.
Moussa M; Abou Chakra M; Peyromaure M; Barry Delongchamps N; Bailly H; Duquesne I
Urologia; 2023 Feb; 90(1):89-99. PubMed ID: 35837737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Seminal vesicle sparing radical perineal prostatectomy].
Schäfers S; de Geeter P; Löhmer H; Albers P
Urologe A; 2009 Apr; 48(4):408-14. PubMed ID: 19145427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A comparison of radical retropubic with perineal prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer within the Uniformed Services Urology Research Group.
Lance RS; Freidrichs PA; Kane C; Powell CR; Pulos E; Moul JW; McLeod DG; Cornum RL; Brantley Thrasher J
BJU Int; 2001 Jan; 87(1):61-5. PubMed ID: 11121994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical comparative evaluation of radical retropubic and perineal prostatectomy approaches for prostate cancer.
Zuo W; Hiraoka Y
Hinyokika Kiyo; 2003 Jan; 49(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 12629774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100% Medicare sample.
Kowalczyk KJ; Levy JM; Caplan CF; Lipsitz SR; Yu HY; Gu X; Hu JC
Eur Urol; 2012 Apr; 61(4):803-9. PubMed ID: 22209053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Propensity score comparison of the various radical surgical techniques for high-risk prostate cancer].
Busch J; Gonzalgo M; Leva N; Ferrari M; Friedersdorff F; Hinz S; Kempkensteffen C; Miller K; Magheli A
Aktuelle Urol; 2015 Jan; 46(1):45-51. PubMed ID: 25526221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cost comparison of radical retropubic and radical perineal prostatectomy: single institution experience.
Silverstein AD; Weizer AZ; Dowell JM; Auge BK; Paulson DF; Dahm P
Urology; 2004 Apr; 63(4):746-50. PubMed ID: 15072893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Learning curve of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: Comprehensive evaluation and cumulative summation analysis of oncological outcomes.
Sivaraman A; Sanchez-Salas R; Prapotnich D; Yu K; Olivier F; Secin FP; Barret E; Galiano M; Rozet F; Cathelineau X
Urol Oncol; 2017 Apr; 35(4):149.e1-149.e6. PubMed ID: 28117215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy.
Hu JC; Gu X; Lipsitz SR; Barry MJ; D'Amico AV; Weinberg AC; Keating NL
JAMA; 2009 Oct; 302(14):1557-64. PubMed ID: 19826025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Outcome and complications of radical prostatectomy in patients with PSA <10 ng/ml: comparison between the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach.
Salomon L; Levrel O; Anastasiadis AG; Saint F; de La Taille A; Cicco A; Vordos D; Hoznek A; Chopin D; Abbou CC
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2002; 5(4):285-90. PubMed ID: 12627213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Using Single-port Perineal Approach: Technique and Single-surgeon Matched-paired Comparative Outcomes.
Lenfant L; Garisto J; Sawczyn G; Wilson CA; Aminsharifi A; Kim S; Schwen Z; Bertolo R; Kaouk J
Eur Urol; 2021 Mar; 79(3):384-392. PubMed ID: 33357990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Contemporary appraisal of radical perineal prostatectomy.
Janoff DM; Parra RO
J Urol; 2005 Jun; 173(6):1863-70. PubMed ID: 15879765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Radical retropubic vs. radical perineal prostatectomy: a comparison of relative benefits in four urban hospitals.
May M; Dorst M; May J; Hoschke B; Fahlenkamp D; Vogler H; Siegsmund M
Urol Nurs; 2007 Dec; 27(6):519-26. PubMed ID: 18217535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Interval from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy does not affect immediate operative outcomes for open or minimally invasive approach.
Park B; Choo SH; Jeon HG; Jeong BC; Seo SI; Jeon SS; Lee HM; Choi HY
J Korean Med Sci; 2014 Dec; 29(12):1688-93. PubMed ID: 25469071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of surgical technique (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic-assisted) on pathological and biochemical outcomes following radical prostatectomy: an analysis using propensity score matching.
Magheli A; Gonzalgo ML; Su LM; Guzzo TJ; Netto G; Humphreys EB; Han M; Partin AW; Pavlovich CP
BJU Int; 2011 Jun; 107(12):1956-62. PubMed ID: 21044243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Inguinal hernia after radical perineal prostatectomy: comparison with the retropubic approach.
Matsubara A; Yoneda T; Nakamoto T; Maruyama S; Koda S; Goto K; Teishima J; Shiina H; Igawa M; Usui T
Urology; 2007 Dec; 70(6):1152-6. PubMed ID: 18158037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
