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.
127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28430728)
1. 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]
2. 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]
4. Anatomic Outcomes of Robotic Assisted Supracervical Hysterectomy and Concurrent Sacrocolpopexy at a Tertiary Care Institution at Initial Adaptation of the Procedure. Prendergast E; Silver H; Johnson LL; Simon M; Feinglass J; Kielb S; Hairston J; Lewicky-Gaupp C Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2016; 22(1):29-32. PubMed ID: 26680565 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Perioperative, postoperative and anatomical outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy. Kilic GS; Lee T; Lewis K; Demirkiran C; Dursun F; Unlu BS J Obstet Gynaecol; 2021 May; 41(4):651-654. PubMed ID: 33045854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Surgical cost of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a comparison of two robotic platforms. Glass Clark S; Shepherd JP; Sassani JC; Bonidie M Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Jan; 34(1):87-91. PubMed ID: 36282303 [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. 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]
9. 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]
10. A systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Pan K; Zhang Y; Wang Y; Wang Y; Xu H Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 Mar; 132(3):284-91. PubMed ID: 26797199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: early postoperative outcomes after surgical reduction of enlarged genital hiatus. Bradley MS; Askew AL; Vaughan MH; Kawasaki A; Visco AG Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 May; 218(5):514.e1-514.e8. PubMed ID: 29425837 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Robotic sacrocolpopexy for the management of pelvic organ prolapse: a review of midterm surgical and quality of life outcomes. Barboglio PG; Toler AJ; Triaca V Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2014; 20(1):38-43. PubMed ID: 24368487 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Change in cost after 5 years of experience with robotic-assisted hysterectomy for the treatment of endometrial cancer. Avondstondt AM; Wallenstein M; D'Adamo CR; Ehsanipoor RM J Robot Surg; 2018 Mar; 12(1):93-96. PubMed ID: 28439744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Robotic sacrocolpopexy for posthysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse: a case series of 31 patients by a single surgeon with a long term follow-up. Pellegrino A; Damiani GR; Villa M; Sportelli C; Pezzotta MG Minerva Ginecol; 2017 Feb; 69(1):13-17. PubMed ID: 28116884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. One-year functional and anatomic outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal extraperitoneal colpopexy with mesh. Jambusaria LH; Murphy M; Lucente VR Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2015; 21(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 25185594 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimizing the robotic surgery team: an operations management perspective. Harmanli O; Solak S; Bayram A; Yuksel B; Jones K Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Jun; 32(6):1379-1385. PubMed ID: 32902765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparative Perioperative Pain and Recovery in Women Undergoing Vaginal Reconstruction Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy. Westermann LB; Crisp CC; Mazloomdoost D; Kleeman SD; Pauls RN Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2017; 23(2):95-100. PubMed ID: 28067743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]