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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27643518)

  • 41. 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]  

  • 42. Effect of a disposable automated suturing device on cost and operating room time in benign total laparoscopic hysterectomy procedures.
    Hart S; Hashemi L; Sobolewski CJ
    JSLS; 2013; 17(4):508-16. PubMed ID: 24398190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Laparoscopically-assisted vaginal hysterectomy for enlarged uterus: operative outcomes and the learning curve.
    Dolanbay M; Kutuk MS; Ozgun MT; Uludag S; Sahin Y
    Ginekol Pol; 2016; 87(5):333-7. PubMed ID: 27304647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Is total laparoscopic hysterectomy with longer operative time associated with a decreased benefit compared with total abdominal hysterectomy?
    Chakraborty N; Rhodes S; Luchristt D; Bretschneider CE; Sheyn D
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Feb; 228(2):205.e1-205.e12. PubMed ID: 36202231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery in uterine pathology.
    Saceanu SM; Cela V; Pluchino N; Angelescu C; Surlin V; Genazzani A
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2013 Jul; 169(2):340-2. PubMed ID: 23578812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Safety and feasibility of the three-port robot-assisted hysterectomy across uterine weights.
    Tyan P; Klebanoff JS; Frangieh M; North A; Smith S; Amdur R; Kazma J; Moawad GN
    J Robot Surg; 2021 Apr; 15(2):259-264. PubMed ID: 32557096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Impact of robotic technology on hysterectomy route and associated implications for resident education.
    Jeppson PC; Rahimi S; Gattoc L; Westermann LB; Cichowski S; Raker C; LeBrun EEW; Sung VW;
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Feb; 212(2):196.e1-6. PubMed ID: 25068556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. 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]  

  • 49. Total Laparoscopic (S-LPS) versus TELELAP ALF-X Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy: A Case-Control Study.
    Fanfani F; Restaino S; Rossitto C; Gueli Alletti S; Costantini B; Monterossi G; Cappuccio S; Perrone E; Scambia G
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2016; 23(6):933-8. PubMed ID: 27247263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Longer Operative Time During Benign Laparoscopic and Robotic Hysterectomy Is Associated With Increased 30-Day Perioperative Complications.
    Catanzarite T; Saha S; Pilecki MA; Kim JY; Milad MP
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015; 22(6):1049-58. PubMed ID: 26070725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Robotic Trachelectomy After Supracervical Hysterectomy for Benign Gynecologic Disease.
    Tsafrir Z; Aoun J; Hanna R; Papalekas E; Schiff L; Theoharis E; Eisenstein D
    JSLS; 2016; 20(3):. PubMed ID: 27493470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery for gynecologic and urologic oncology: an evidence-based analysis.
    Medical Advisory Secretariat
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2010; 10(27):1-118. PubMed ID: 23074405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. 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]  

  • 54. Implementation of robotic gynecological surgery in a German University Hospital: patient safety after 110 procedures.
    Balafoutas D; Wöckel A; Wulff C; Joukhadar R
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2020 Dec; 302(6):1381-1388. PubMed ID: 32844240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Subtotal Hysterectomy with Single Port Access Laparoscopy: Gadget or Progress?
    Abo C; Roman H
    Chirurgia (Bucur); 2016; 111(2):144-50. PubMed ID: 27172528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Clinical indications for hysterectomy route: patient characteristics or physician preference?
    Dorsey JH; Steinberg EP; Holtz PM
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Nov; 173(5):1452-60. PubMed ID: 7503184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Comparison of cost and operative outcomes of robotic hysterectomy compared to laparoscopic hysterectomy across different uterine weights.
    Moawad GN; Abi Khalil ED; Tyan P; Shu MK; Samuel D; Amdur R; Scheib SA; Marfori CQ
    J Robot Surg; 2017 Dec; 11(4):433-439. PubMed ID: 28144809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Large Uterus.
    Sinha R; Bana R; Sanjay M
    JSLS; 2019; 23(1):. PubMed ID: 30675091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Robotic glove port technique for the endowristed rigid instruments in robotic single-site transabdominal and transvaginal surgery.
    Yang YS
    J Robot Surg; 2021 Apr; 15(2):241-249. PubMed ID: 32506299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Robotic versus abdominal hysterectomy for very large uteri.
    Silasi DA; Gallo T; Silasi M; Menderes G; Azodi M
    JSLS; 2013; 17(3):400-6. PubMed ID: 24018076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.