These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

682 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27145311)

  • 1. Comparison of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Colectomies Using a Large National Database: Outcomes and Trends Related to Surgery Center Volume.
    Yeo HL; Isaacs AJ; Abelson JS; Milsom JW; Sedrakyan A
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Jun; 59(6):535-42. PubMed ID: 27145311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Minimally invasive surgery and sphincter preservation in rectal cancer.
    Yeo HL; Abelson JS; Mao J; Cheerharan M; Milsom J; Sedrakyan A
    J Surg Res; 2016 May; 202(2):299-307. PubMed ID: 27229104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis.
    Dolejs SC; Waters JA; Ceppa EP; Zarzaur BL
    Surg Endosc; 2017 Jun; 31(6):2387-2396. PubMed ID: 27655383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A National Database Analysis Comparing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in Laparoscopic vs Open Colectomies: Inherent Variance May Impact Outcomes.
    Schlussel AT; Delaney CP; Maykel JA; Lustik MB; Nishtala M; Steele SR
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Sep; 59(9):843-54. PubMed ID: 27505113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Abdominoperineal Resections in Patients With Rectal Cancer.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z; Phelan M; Smith BR; Stamos MJ
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2015 Dec; 58(12):1123-9. PubMed ID: 26544808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Predicting opportunities to increase utilization of laparoscopy for colon cancer.
    Keller DS; Parikh N; Senagore AJ
    Surg Endosc; 2017 Apr; 31(4):1855-1862. PubMed ID: 27572064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Short-term outcomes for robotic colorectal surgery by provider volume.
    Keller DS; Hashemi L; Lu M; Delaney CP
    J Am Coll Surg; 2013 Dec; 217(6):1063-9.e1. PubMed ID: 24041555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Do the advantages of a minimally invasive approach remain in complex colorectal procedures? A nationwide comparison.
    Schlussel AT; Lustik MB; Johnson EK; Maykel JA; Champagne BJ; Goldberg JE; Steele SR
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2015 Apr; 58(4):431-43. PubMed ID: 25751800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of 30-Day Postoperative Outcomes after Laparoscopic vs Robotic Colectomy.
    Miller PE; Dao H; Paluvoi N; Bailey M; Margolin D; Shah N; Vargas HD
    J Am Coll Surg; 2016 Aug; 223(2):369-73. PubMed ID: 27109780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Growth of laparoscopic colectomy in the United States: analysis of regional and socioeconomic factors over time.
    Bardakcioglu O; Khan A; Aldridge C; Chen J
    Ann Surg; 2013 Aug; 258(2):270-4. PubMed ID: 23598378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for total abdominal colectomy.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z; Hanna MH; Carmichael JC; Pigazzi A; Stamos MJ; Mills S
    Surg Endosc; 2016 Jul; 30(7):2792-8. PubMed ID: 26487196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Laparoscopic colon resection trends in utilization and rate of conversion to open procedure: a national database review of academic medical centers.
    Simorov A; Shaligram A; Shostrom V; Boilesen E; Thompson J; Oleynikov D
    Ann Surg; 2012 Sep; 256(3):462-8. PubMed ID: 22868361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variations in Laparoscopic Colectomy Utilization in the United States.
    Moghadamyeghaneh Z; Carmichael JC; Mills S; Pigazzi A; Nguyen NT; Stamos MJ
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2015 Oct; 58(10):950-6. PubMed ID: 26347967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era.
    Tyler JA; Fox JP; Desai MM; Perry WB; Glasgow SC
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2013 Apr; 56(4):458-66. PubMed ID: 23478613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The current status of emergent laparoscopic colectomy: a population-based study of clinical and financial outcomes.
    Keller DS; Pedraza R; Flores-Gonzalez JR; LeFave JP; Mahmood A; Haas EM
    Surg Endosc; 2016 Aug; 30(8):3321-6. PubMed ID: 26490770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Use of Pediatric Open, Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Ureteral Reimplantation in the United States: 2000 to 2012.
    Bowen DK; Faasse MA; Liu DB; Gong EM; Lindgren BW; Johnson EK
    J Urol; 2016 Jul; 196(1):207-12. PubMed ID: 26880414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical outcomes and resource utilization associated with laparoscopic and open colectomy using a large national database.
    Delaney CP; Chang E; Senagore AJ; Broder M
    Ann Surg; 2008 May; 247(5):819-24. PubMed ID: 18438119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Adoption of Robotic Technology for Treating Colorectal Cancer.
    Schootman M; Hendren S; Ratnapradipa K; Stringer L; Davidson NO
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Nov; 59(11):1011-1018. PubMed ID: 27749475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Robotic Technology in Emergency General Surgery Cases in the Era of Minimally Invasive Surgery.
    Lunardi N; Abou-Zamzam A; Florecki KL; Chidambaram S; Shih IF; Kent AJ; Joseph B; Byrne JP; Sakran JV
    JAMA Surg; 2024 May; 159(5):493-499. PubMed ID: 38446451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 35.