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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28121585)

  • 1. Open vs. Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy: Commercially Insured Costs and Readmissions.
    Fitch K; Huh W; Bochner A
    Manag Care; 2016 Aug; 25(8):40-47. PubMed ID: 28121585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cost Differences Between Open and Minimally Invasive Surgery.
    Fitch K; Engel T; Bochner A
    Manag Care; 2015 Sep; 24(9):40-8. PubMed ID: 26521339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Open abdominal versus laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy: analysis of a large United States payer measuring quality and cost of care.
    Warren L; Ladapo JA; Borah BJ; Gunnarsson CL
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2009; 16(5):581-8. PubMed ID: 19835801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Nationwide trends in the utilization of and payments for hysterectomy in the United States among commercially insured women.
    Morgan DM; Kamdar NS; Swenson CW; Kobernik EK; Sammarco AG; Nallamothu B
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Apr; 218(4):425.e1-425.e18. PubMed ID: 29288067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Health resource utilization and costs during the first 90 days following robot-assisted hysterectomy.
    Dandolu V; Pathak P
    Int Urogynecol J; 2018 Jun; 29(6):865-872. PubMed ID: 28785778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of robotic and other minimally invasive routes of hysterectomy for benign indications.
    Swenson CW; Kamdar NS; Harris JA; Uppal S; Campbell DA; Morgan DM
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Nov; 215(5):650.e1-650.e8. PubMed ID: 27343568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A new perspective on the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery-payer, provider, and patient benefits.
    Keller DS; Senagore AJ; Fitch K; Bochner A; Haas EM
    Surg Endosc; 2017 Jul; 31(7):2846-2853. PubMed ID: 27815745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Trends in readmission rate by route of hysterectomy - a single-center experience.
    Kreuninger JA; Cohen SL; Meurs EAIM; Cox M; Vitonis A; Jansen FW; Einarsson JI
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2018 Mar; 97(3):285-293. PubMed ID: 29192965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [A comparative analysis of hysterectomies].
    Aniuliene R; Varzgaliene L; Varzgalis M
    Medicina (Kaunas); 2007; 43(2):118-24. PubMed ID: 17329946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cost comparison of laparoscopic colectomy versus open colectomy in colon cancer.
    Fitch K; Bochner A; Keller DS
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2017 Jul; 33(7):1215-1221. PubMed ID: 28326894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Culture-Confirmed
    Rashid N; Begier E; Lin KJ; Yu H
    Surg Infect (Larchmt); 2020 Mar; 21(2):169-178. PubMed ID: 31580776
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Temporal trend and nationwide utility for hysterectomies in Taiwan, 1997-2010.
    Huang WY; Huang KH; Chang WC; Wu SC
    Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Oct; 55(5):659-665. PubMed ID: 27751412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Vaginal and Laparoscopic hysterectomy as an outpatient procedure: A systematic review.
    Dedden SJ; Geomini PMAJ; Huirne JAF; Bongers MY
    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2017 Sep; 216():212-223. PubMed ID: 28810192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy with traditional hysterectomy for cost-effectiveness to employers.
    Lenihan JP; Kovanda C; Cammarano C
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Jun; 190(6):1714-20; discussion 1720-2. PubMed ID: 15284779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The shift from inpatient to outpatient hysterectomy for endometrial cancer in the United States: trends, enabling factors, cost, and safety.
    Cappuccio S; Li Y; Song C; Liu E; Glaser G; Casarin J; Grassi T; Butler K; Magtibay P; Magrina JF; Scambia G; Mariani A; Langstraat C
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2021 May; 31(5):686-693. PubMed ID: 33727220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy and Power Morcellation Trends in a West Coast Integrated Health System.
    Zaritsky E; Tucker LY; Neugebauer R; Chou T; Flanagan T; Walter AJ; Raine-Bennett T
    Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jun; 129(6):996-1005. PubMed ID: 28486359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. In-hospital complications of vaginal versus laparoscopic-assisted benign hysterectomy among older women: a propensity score-matched cohort study.
    Lai JC; Chen HH; Huang SM; Wang KL; Huang N; Hu HY; Chou YJ
    Menopause; 2016 Nov; 23(11):1233-1238. PubMed ID: 27465711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Risks and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy: a decision analysis.
    Cadish LA; Shepherd JP; Barber EL; Ridgeway B
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 217(5):603.e1-603.e6. PubMed ID: 28619689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.