863 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26992935)
1. Robotic Single-Site and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Gynecology: Clinical Outcomes and Cost Analysis of a Matched Case-Control Study.
El Hachem L; Andikyan V; Mathews S; Friedman K; Poeran J; Shieh K; Geoghegan M; Gretz HF
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(5):760-8. PubMed ID: 26992935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing Single-Site and Multiport Robotic Hysterectomy with Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping for Endometrial Cancer: Surgical Outcomes and Cost Analysis.
Moukarzel LA; Sinno AK; Fader AN; Tanner EJ
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(6):977-983. PubMed ID: 28599884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Single-site Versus Multiport Robotic Hysterectomy in Benign Gynecologic Diseases: A Retrospective Evaluation of Surgical Outcomes and Cost Analysis.
Bogliolo S; Ferrero S; Cassani C; Musacchi V; Zanellini F; Dominoni M; Spinillo A; Gardella B
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(4):603-9. PubMed ID: 26898895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Feasibility and Learning Curve of Robotic Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery in Gynecology.
Buckley de Meritens A; Kim J; Dinkelspiel H; Chapman-Davis E; Caputo T; Holcomb KM
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):323-328. PubMed ID: 27867048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Robotic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a matched case-control study.
Sarlos D; Kots L; Stevanovic N; Schaer G
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2010 May; 150(1):92-6. PubMed ID: 20207063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The clinical experience of robot-assisted surgery in gynecologic cancer.
Li XL; Du DF; Jiang H
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol; 2017 Apr; 26(2):119-123. PubMed ID: 27667447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Feasibility of Robotic-Assisted Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery in the Gynecologic Oncology Setting.
Moukarzel LA; Fader AN; Tanner EJ
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):258-263. PubMed ID: 27815041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Learning curve and surgical outcome for robotic-assisted hysterectomy with lymphadenectomy: case-matched controlled comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy for treatment of endometrial cancer.
Lim PC; Kang E; Park DH
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(6):739-48. PubMed ID: 20955983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Gynecologic robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: prospective analysis of feasibility, safety, and technique.
Scheib SA; Fader AN
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Feb; 212(2):179.e1-8. PubMed ID: 25088863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Implementation of a robotic surgical program in gynaecological oncology and comparison with prior laparoscopic series.
Povolotskaya N; Woolas R; Brinkmann D
Int J Surg Oncol; 2015; 2015():814315. PubMed ID: 25785195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Robot-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and immediate costs.
Advincula AP; Xu X; Goudeau S; Ransom SB
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2007; 14(6):698-705. PubMed ID: 17980329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of robotic and other minimally invasive routes of hysterectomy for benign indications.
Swenson CW; Kamdar NS; Harris JA; Uppal S; Campbell DA; Morgan DM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Nov; 215(5):650.e1-650.e8. PubMed ID: 27343568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Telelap ALF-X vs Standard Laparoscopy for the Treatment of Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Single-Institution Retrospective Cohort Study.
Gueli Alletti S; Rossitto C; Cianci S; Restaino S; Costantini B; Fanfani F; Fagotti A; Cosentino F; Scambia G
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(3):378-83. PubMed ID: 26602025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Overall care cost comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for endometrial and cervical cancer.
Desille-Gbaguidi H; Hebert T; Paternotte-Villemagne J; Gaborit C; Rush E; Body G
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2013 Dec; 171(2):348-52. PubMed ID: 24135382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Safety, feasibility and learning curve of robotic single-site surgery in gynecology.
El Hachem L; Momeni M; Friedman K; Moshier EL; Chuang LT; Gretz HF
Int J Med Robot; 2016 Sep; 12(3):509-16. PubMed ID: 26096813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
