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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28106657)

  • 1. Impact of Case Order on Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: Do Surgeons Need a Warm-Up?
    Lavelle ES; Turner LC; Shepherd JP
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2017; 23(4):272-275. PubMed ID: 28106657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Impact of Obesity on Intraoperative Complications and Prolapse Recurrence After Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy.
    Turner L; Lavelle E; Lowder JL; Shepherd JP
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2016; 22(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 27054791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparing laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy surgical outcomes with prior versus concomitant hysterectomy.
    Dubinskaya A; Hernandez-Aranda D; Wakefield DB; Shepherd JP
    Int Urogynecol J; 2020 Feb; 31(2):401-407. PubMed ID: 31256223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of surgical start time in patients undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.
    Jallad K; Barber MD; Ridgeway B; Paraiso MF; Unger CA
    Int Urogynecol J; 2016 Oct; 27(10):1535-9. PubMed ID: 27026142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessing the learning curve of robotic sacrocolpopexy.
    Linder BJ; Anand M; Weaver AL; Woelk JL; Klingele CJ; Trabuco EC; Occhino JA; Gebhart JB
    Int Urogynecol J; 2016 Feb; 27(2):239-46. PubMed ID: 26294206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The impact of fellowship surgical training on operative time and patient morbidity during robotics-assisted sacrocolpopexy.
    Carter-Brooks CM; Du AL; Bonidie MJ; Shepherd JP
    Int Urogynecol J; 2018 Sep; 29(9):1317-1323. PubMed ID: 28889173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Single Port Robotic Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: Our Experience With the First 25 Cases.
    Matanes E; Lauterbach R; Mustafa-Mikhail S; Amit A; Wiener Z; Lowenstein L
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2017; 23(3):e14-e18. PubMed ID: 28134702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Operative Time for Minimally Invasive Sacrocolpopexy: Comparison of Conventional Laparoscopy versus Robotic Platform.
    Glass Clark S; Melnyk AI; Bonidie M; Giugale L; Bradley MS
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2022 Sep; 29(9):1063-1067. PubMed ID: 35605827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Preoperative warming up exercises improve laparoscopic operative times in an experienced laparoscopic surgeon.
    Mucksavage P; Lee J; Kerbl DC; Clayman RV; McDougall EM
    J Endourol; 2012 Jul; 26(7):765-8. PubMed ID: 22050510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Robotic-assisted surgery in urogynecology--our experience with the first 100 cases: experience from a single institution].
    Mustafa S; Mustafa M; Burke Y; Nibal AK; Deutsch M; Deutsch M; Lowenstein L
    Harefuah; 2014 Aug; 153(8):448-52, 499. PubMed ID: 25286633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Trainee participation and perioperative complications in benign hysterectomy: the effect of route of surgery.
    Barber EL; Harris B; Gehrig PA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Aug; 215(2):215.e1-7. PubMed ID: 26884272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: operative times and efficiency in a high-volume female pelvic medicine and laparoscopic surgery practice.
    Moore R; Moriarty C; Chinthakanan O; Miklos J
    Int Urogynecol J; 2017 Jun; 28(6):887-892. PubMed ID: 27766346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy using Seratex Slimsling: pilot study.
    Vašíček M; Pilka R; Eim JB
    Ceska Gynekol; 2019; 84(6):412-417. PubMed ID: 31948248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Does Surgeon Experience Impact the Risk of Complications After Bernese Periacetabular Osteotomy?
    Novais EN; Carry PM; Kestel LA; Ketterman B; Brusalis CM; Sankar WN
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Apr; 475(4):1110-1117. PubMed ID: 27495809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The Impact of a Dedicated Robotic Team on Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy Outcomes.
    Carter-Brooks CM; Du AL; Bonidie MJ; Shepherd JP
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2018; 24(1):13-16. PubMed ID: 28430728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cost-minimization analysis of robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and abdominal sacrocolpopexy.
    Judd JP; Siddiqui NY; Barnett JC; Visco AG; Havrilesky LJ; Wu JM
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2010; 17(4):493-9. PubMed ID: 20621010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Adoption of robotic sacrocolpopexy at an academic institution.
    Bradley MS; Kantartzis KL; Lowder JL; Winger D; Wang L; Shepherd JP
    JSLS; 2014; 18(3):. PubMed ID: 25392622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of complications and prolapse recurrence between laparoscopic and vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension for the treatment of vaginal prolapse.
    Turner LC; Lavelle ES; Shepherd JP
    Int Urogynecol J; 2016 May; 27(5):797-803. PubMed ID: 26658893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluating the Impact of Intraoperative Surgical Team Handoffs on Patient Outcomes.
    Giugale LE; Sears S; Lavelle ES; Carter-Brooks CM; Bonidie M; Shepherd JP
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2017; 23(5):288-292. PubMed ID: 28106651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse: 8 years experience.
    Granese R; Candiani M; Perino A; Romano F; Cucinella G
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2009 Oct; 146(2):227-31. PubMed ID: 19615810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.