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 *

284 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27637233)

  • 1. Progressive reduction in abdominal hysterectomy rates: impact of laparoscopy, robotics and surgeon factors.
    Moen M; Noone M; Cholkeri-Singh A; Vassallo B; Locker B; Miller C
    J Robot Surg; 2014 Mar; 8(1):13-7. PubMed ID: 27637233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Hospital costs of total vaginal hysterectomy compared with other minimally invasive hysterectomy.
    Dayaratna S; Goldberg J; Harrington C; Leiby BE; McNeil JM
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Feb; 210(2):120.e1-6. PubMed ID: 24060444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minimally invasive specialists and rates of laparoscopic hysterectomy.
    Loring M; Morris SN; Isaacson KB
    JSLS; 2015; 19(1):e2014.00221. PubMed ID: 25848189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Inpatient Laparoscopic Hysterectomy in the United States: Trends and Factors Associated With Approach Selection.
    Desai VB; Guo XM; Fan L; Wright JD; Xu X
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):151-158.e1. PubMed ID: 27614151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Hysterectomy Trends and Risk of Vaginal Cuff Dehiscence: An Update by Mode of Surgery.
    Polin M; Boone R; Lim F; Advincula AP; May B; Hur C; Hur HC
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2023 Jul; 30(7):562-568. PubMed ID: 36921892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Incidence and patient characteristics of vaginal cuff dehiscence after different modes of hysterectomies.
    Hur HC; Guido RS; Mansuria SM; Hacker MR; Sanfilippo JS; Lee TT
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2007; 14(3):311-7. PubMed ID: 17478361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multicenter analysis comparing robotic, open, laparoscopic, and vaginal hysterectomies performed by high-volume surgeons for benign indications.
    Lim PC; Crane JT; English EJ; Farnam RW; Garza DM; Winter ML; Rozeboom JL
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 Jun; 133(3):359-64. PubMed ID: 26952352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact of power morcellator removal on hysterectomy practice patterns.
    Wesol A; Woolley S
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2017 Aug; 215():41-44. PubMed ID: 28599164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative analysis of different laparoscopic hysterectomy procedures.
    Hobson DT; Imudia AN; Al-Safi ZA; Shade G; Kruger M; Diamond MP; Awonuga AO
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2012 May; 285(5):1353-61. PubMed ID: 22124531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A series of 3190 laparoscopic hysterectomies for benign disease from 1990 to 2006: evaluation of complications compared with vaginal and abdominal procedures.
    Donnez O; Jadoul P; Squifflet J; Donnez J
    BJOG; 2009 Mar; 116(4):492-500. PubMed ID: 19016683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cost comparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus standard laparoscopic hysterectomy.
    Winter ML; Leu SY; Lagrew DC; Bustillo G
    J Robot Surg; 2015 Dec; 9(4):269-75. PubMed ID: 26530837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Laparoscopic hysterectomy: the Kaiser Permanente San Diego experience.
    Hoffman CP; Kennedy J; Borschel L; Burchette R; Kidd A
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2005; 12(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 15904592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of robotic surgery on hysterectomy trends: implications for resident education.
    Yamasato K; Casey D; Kaneshiro B; Hiraoka M
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(3):399-405. PubMed ID: 24172026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Histologic artifacts in abdominal, vaginal, laparoscopic, and robotic hysterectomy specimens: a blinded, retrospective review.
    Krizova A; Clarke BA; Bernardini MQ; James S; Kalloger SE; Boerner SL; Mulligan AM
    Am J Surg Pathol; 2011 Jan; 35(1):115-26. PubMed ID: 21164295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An analysis of the impact of previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience on the learning curve for robotic hysterectomy.
    Eddib A; Jain N; Aalto M; Hughes S; Eswar A; Erk M; Michalik C; Krovi V; Singhal P
    J Robot Surg; 2013 Sep; 7(3):295-9. PubMed ID: 27000926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted hysterectomies with conventional hysterectomies.
    Abdollahi SF; Bahlouli A; Mostafa PG; Rasooli S; Morteza G
    Saudi Med J; 2009 Jun; 30(6):813-6. PubMed ID: 19526166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy.
    Giep BN; Giep HN; Hubert HB
    J Robot Surg; 2010 Sep; 4(3):167-75. PubMed ID: 20835393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Hysterectomy trends over a 9-year period in an endoscopic teaching center.
    Schollmeyer T; Elessawy M; Chastamouratidhs B; Alkatout I; Meinhold-Heerlein I; Mettler L; Jonat W; Weigel MT
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2014 Jul; 126(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 24825496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. The impact of robotics on the mode of benign hysterectomy and clinical outcomes.
    Luciano AA; Luciano DE; Gabbert J; Seshadri-Kreaden U
    Int J Med Robot; 2016 Mar; 12(1):114-24. PubMed ID: 25753111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.