416 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26744108)
41. Trends and comparative effectiveness of inpatient radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer in the United States (2012-2015).
Uppal S; Rebecca Liu J; Kevin Reynolds R; Rice LW; Spencer RJ
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Jan; 152(1):133-138. PubMed ID: 30424895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.
Vasudevan V; Reusche R; Wallace H; Kaza S
Surg Endosc; 2016 Dec; 30(12):5490-5493. PubMed ID: 27126626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Five-Year Experience in the Surgical Treatment of Endometrial Cancer: Comparing Laparotomy with Robotic and Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy.
Renaud MC; Sebastianelli A; Grégoire J; Plante M
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2022 Jan; 44(1):21-27. PubMed ID: 34474173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Comparison of perioperative outcomes and cost between robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopy for transperitoneal infrarenal para-aortic lymphadenectomy (TIPAL).
Coronado PJ; Fasero M; Magrina JF; Herraiz MA; Vidart JA
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(4):674-81. PubMed ID: 24486680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Introduction of a computer-based surgical platform in the surgical care of patients with newly diagnosed uterine cancer: outcomes and impact on approach.
Leitao MM; Briscoe G; Santos K; Winder A; Jewell EL; Hoskins WJ; Chi DS; Abu-Rustum NR; Sonoda Y; Brown CL; Levine DA; Barakat RR; Gardner GJ
Gynecol Oncol; 2012 May; 125(2):394-9. PubMed ID: 22307063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Same-day discharge is feasible and safe in patients undergoing minimally invasive staging for gynecologic malignancies.
Penner KR; Fleming ND; Barlavi L; Axtell AE; Lentz SE
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Feb; 212(2):186.e1-8. PubMed ID: 25132462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. 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]
48. A population-based registry study evaluating surgery in newly diagnosed uterine cancer.
Borgfeldt C; Kalapotharakos G; Asciutto KC; Löfgren M; Högberg T
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2016 Aug; 95(8):901-11. PubMed ID: 27124384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer.
Rabinovich A
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Aug; 27(4):302-7. PubMed ID: 26134173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Minimally invasive surgery for endometrial cancer: a comprehensive review.
Rabinovich A
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2015 Apr; 291(4):721-7. PubMed ID: 25344420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Incorporating robotic-assisted surgery for endometrial cancer staging: Analysis of morbidity and costs.
Bogani G; Multinu F; Dowdy SC; Cliby WA; Wilson TO; Gostout BS; Weaver AL; Borah BJ; Killian JM; Bijlani A; Angioni S; Mariani A
Gynecol Oncol; 2016 May; 141(2):218-224. PubMed ID: 26896826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Does Surgical Teaching Take Time? Resident Participation in Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer.
Freeman AH; Barrie A; Lyon L; Conell C; Garcia C; Littell RD; Powell CB
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(5):783-789. PubMed ID: 28336363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Robotic Hysterectomy in Severely Obese Patients With Endometrial Cancer: A Multicenter Study.
Corrado G; Chiantera V; Fanfani F; Cutillo G; Lucidi A; Mancini E; Pedone Anchora L; Scambia G; Vizza E
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):94-100. PubMed ID: 26342450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Comparative Surgical Outcomes for Endometrial Cancer Patients 65 Years Old or Older Staged With Robotics or Laparotomy.
Doo DW; Guntupalli SR; Corr BR; Sheeder J; Davidson SA; Behbakht K; Jarrett MJ; Guy MS
Ann Surg Oncol; 2015 Oct; 22(11):3687-94. PubMed ID: 25672563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Surgical management of early-stage endometrial cancer in the elderly: is laparoscopy feasible?
Scribner DR; Walker JL; Johnson GA; McMeekin SD; Gold MA; Mannel RS
Gynecol Oncol; 2001 Dec; 83(3):563-8. PubMed ID: 11733973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Variability between individual surgeons in route of hysterectomy for patients with endometrial cancer in Florida.
Carrubba AR; Osagiede O; Spaulding AC; Cochuyt JJ; Hodge DO; Robertson MW; DeStephano CC
Surg Oncol; 2019 Dec; 31():55-60. PubMed ID: 31539642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Hand-Assisted Robotic Surgery for Staging of Ovarian Cancer and Uterine Cancers With High Risk of Peritoneal Spread: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Fornalik H; Brooks H; Moore ES; Flanders NL; Callahan MJ; Sutton GP
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2015 Oct; 25(8):1488-93. PubMed ID: 26270117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Early endometrial carcinoma therapy in morbid obesity: A retrospective study comparing open and laparoscopic.
Cheng Z; He X; Zhao A; Zhang Q; Li Y
Int J Surg; 2016 Jun; 30():31-4. PubMed ID: 27102329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Surgical and oncological outcome of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic and abdominal surgery in the management of endometrial cancer.
Corrado G; Cutillo G; Pomati G; Mancini E; Sperduti I; Patrizi L; Saltari M; Vincenzoni C; Baiocco E; Vizza E
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2015 Aug; 41(8):1074-81. PubMed ID: 26002986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Endometrial cancer surgery costs: robot vs laparoscopy.
Holtz DO; Miroshnichenko G; Finnegan MO; Chernick M; Dunton CJ
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(4):500-3. PubMed ID: 20547112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
