250 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27590569)
1. Single-Port vs Multiport Laparoscopic Hysterectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Xie W; Cao D; Yang J; Yu M; Shen K; Zhao L
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(7):1049-1056. PubMed ID: 27590569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Multi-institution, Prospective, Randomized Trial to Compare the Success Rates of Single-port Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Uterine Myoma or Adenomyosis.
Kim TJ; Shin SJ; Kim TH; Cho CH; Kwon SH; Seong SJ; Song T; Hur S; Kim YM; Lee SW; Kim YT; Nam EJ; Kim YB; Lee JR; Roh HJ; Chung H
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015; 22(5):785-91. PubMed ID: 25757810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparo-endoscopic single site and multiport laparoscopy in gynecologic operative procedures.
Pontis A; Sedda F; Mereu L; Podda M; Melis GB; Pisanu A; Angioni S
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2016 Sep; 294(3):567-77. PubMed ID: 27168178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.
Johnson N; Barlow D; Lethaby A; Tavender E; Curr E; Garry R
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2005 Jan; (1):CD003677. PubMed ID: 15674911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Short- and long-term outcomes of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies and randomized controlled trials.
Zhu G; Lang X; Zhou S; Li B; Sun Q; Yu L; Zhu Q; Lang W; Jiao X; Zhai S; Xiong J; Fu Y; Qu J
BMC Surg; 2023 Aug; 23(1):223. PubMed ID: 37559035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.
Johnson N; Barlow D; Lethaby A; Tavender E; Curr E; Garry R
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2006 Apr; (2):CD003677. PubMed ID: 16625589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Meta-analysis of Laparoendoscopic Single-site and Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Hysterectomy Compared with Multiport Hysterectomy: Real Benefits or Diminishing Returns?
Michener CM; Lampert E; Yao M; Harnegie MP; Chalif J; Chambers LM
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Mar; 28(3):698-709.e1. PubMed ID: 33346073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Single-port hysterectomy: robotic versus laparoscopic.
Gungor M; Kahraman K; Dursun P; Ozbasli E; Genim C
J Robot Surg; 2018 Mar; 12(1):87-92. PubMed ID: 28429119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery and conventional multiport laparoscopic (CMPL) surgery for hysterectomy: long-term outcomes of abdominal incisional scar.
Demirayak G; Özdemir İA; Comba C; Aslan Çetin B; Aydogan Mathyk B; Yıldız M; Mihmanlı V; Karaca İ; Öztürk M; Güralp O
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2020 Feb; 40(2):217-221. PubMed ID: 31347412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for appendicitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Xue C; Lin B; Huang Z; Chen Z
Surg Today; 2015 Sep; 45(9):1179-86. PubMed ID: 25539980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Single-incision versus conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Chen JM; Geng W; Xie SX; Liu FB; Zhao YJ; Yu LQ; Geng XP
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol; 2015; 24(4):195-203. PubMed ID: 25600865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Single-port versus multiport laparoscopic ileocecal resection for Crohn's disease.
Gardenbroek TJ; Verlaan T; Tanis PJ; Ponsioen CY; D'Haens GR; Buskens CJ; Bemelman WA
J Crohns Colitis; 2013 Nov; 7(10):e443-8. PubMed ID: 23507422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Park DA; Lee DH; Kim SW; Lee SH
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2016 Sep; 42(9):1303-14. PubMed ID: 27439723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Single-Port Laparoscopy vs Conventional Laparoscopy in Benign Adnexal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Schmitt A; Crochet P; Knight S; Tourette C; Loundou A; Agostini A
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017; 24(7):1083-1095. PubMed ID: 28705751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
Albright BB; Witte T; Tofte AN; Chou J; Black JD; Desai VB; Erekson EA
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):18-27. PubMed ID: 26272688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Laparoendoscopic single-site nephrectomy compared with conventional laparoscopic nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.
Fan X; Lin T; Xu K; Yin Z; Huang H; Dong W; Huang J
Eur Urol; 2012 Oct; 62(4):601-12. PubMed ID: 22704730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. A comparison of postoperative pain after transumbilical single-port access and conventional three-port total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.
Chung JH; Baek JM; Chung K; Park EK; Jeung IC; Chang HT; Choi JH; Kim CJ; Lee YS
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2015 Dec; 94(12):1290-6. PubMed ID: 26342188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Single-port compared with conventional laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.
Chen YJ; Wang PH; Ocampo EJ; Twu NF; Yen MS; Chao KC
Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Apr; 117(4):906-912. PubMed ID: 21422864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus conventional laparoscopy for hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sandberg EM; la Chapelle CF; van den Tweel MM; Schoones JW; Jansen FW
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 May; 295(5):1089-1103. PubMed ID: 28357561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
