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.
182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27591050)
41. Risk factors for postoperative urinary retention after laparoscopic and robotic hysterectomy for benign indications. Smorgick N; DeLancey J; Patzkowsky K; Advincula A; Song A; As-Sanie S Obstet Gynecol; 2012 Sep; 120(3):581-6. PubMed ID: 22914467 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Single-Port Robotic Urological Surgery Using Purpose-Built Single-Port Surgical System: Single-Institutional Experience With the First 100 Cases. Kaouk J; Aminsharifi A; Sawczyn G; Kim S; Wilson CA; Garisto J; Fareed K Urology; 2020 Jun; 140():77-84. PubMed ID: 32142725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Comparative outcomes in older and younger women undergoing laparotomy or robotic surgical staging for endometrial cancer. Guy MS; Sheeder J; Behbakht K; Wright JD; Guntupalli SR Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Mar; 214(3):350.e1-350.e10. PubMed ID: 26433173 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Risk Factors and Outcomes of Conversion to Open Surgery in Benign Gynecologic Laparoscopies: A Case-Control Study. Richards L; Healey M; Cheng C; Reddington C; Robson-Hamond C; Dior U J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Oct; 28(10):1786-1794. PubMed ID: 33892186 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Abdominal Hysterectomy: Reduced Risk of Surgical Site Infection Associated with Robotic and Laparoscopic Technique. Colling KP; Glover JK; Statz CA; Geller MA; Beilman GJ Surg Infect (Larchmt); 2015 Oct; 16(5):498-503. PubMed ID: 26070101 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Surgical volume and conversion rate in laparoscopic hysterectomy: does volume matter? A multicenter retrospective cohort study. Keurentjes JHM; Briët JM; de Bock GH; Mourits MJE Surg Endosc; 2018 Feb; 32(2):1021-1026. PubMed ID: 28842767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. The Comparison between Minimally Invasive Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery and Conventional Bypass Grafting Surgery in Proximal LAD Lesion. Ezelsoy M; Caynak B; Bayram M; Oral K; Bayramoglu Z; Sagbas E; Aytekın V; Akpınar B Heart Surg Forum; 2015 Apr; 18(2):E042-6. PubMed ID: 25924029 [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. Perioperative outcomes after totally robotic gastric bypass: a prospective nonrandomized controlled study. Benizri EI; Renaud M; Reibel N; Germain A; Ziegler O; Zarnegar R; Ayav A; Bresler L; Brunaud L Am J Surg; 2013 Aug; 206(2):145-51. PubMed ID: 23735669 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. [Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: Retrospective and comparative study with laparotomy and laparoscopy]. Farache C; Alonso S; Ferrer Marsollier C; Masia F; de Tayrac R; Triopon G J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2012 Jun; 41(4):353-62. PubMed ID: 22542372 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Incorporating low haemoglobin into a risk prediction model for conversion in minimally invasive gynaecologic oncology surgeries. Nguyen KH; Joo H; Manuel S; Chen LM; Chen LL J Obstet Gynaecol; 2024 Dec; 44(1):2349960. PubMed ID: 38783693 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Predictors and implications of unplanned conversion during minimally invasive hepatectomy: an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database. Stiles ZE; Behrman SW; Glazer ES; Deneve JL; Dong L; Wan JY; Dickson PV HPB (Oxford); 2017 Nov; 19(11):957-965. PubMed ID: 28760630 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Novel port placement and 5-mm instrumentation for robotic-assisted hysterectomy. Nezhat CH; Katz A; Dun EC; Kho KA; Wieser FA JSLS; 2014; 18(2):167-73. PubMed ID: 24960478 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: which should we use? Fanfani F; Restaino S; Ercoli A; Chiantera V; Fagotti A; Gallotta V; Monterossi G; Cappuccio S; Scambia G Minerva Ginecol; 2016 Aug; 68(4):423-30. PubMed ID: 26633042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. A comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy to robotically assisted hysterectomy: surgical outcomes in a community practice. Payne TN; Dauterive FR J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2008; 15(3):286-91. PubMed ID: 18439499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Trendelenburg position in gynecologic robotic-assisted surgery. Ghomi A; Kramer C; Askari R; Chavan NR; Einarsson JI J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2012; 19(4):485-9. PubMed ID: 22748954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Conversion Rate in Pediatric Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Looking for the Culprit. Di Fabrizio D; Lisi G; Lauriti G; Di Renzo D; Lannutti A; Marino N; Lelli Chiesa P J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2020 Mar; 30(3):315-321. PubMed ID: 31976805 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]