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.
438 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29554090)
1. Robotic radical hysterectomy is superior to laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of cervical cancer. Jin YM; Liu SS; Chen J; Chen YN; Ren CC PLoS One; 2018; 13(3):e0193033. PubMed ID: 29554090 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Efficacy of robotic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer compared with that of open and laparoscopic surgery: A separate meta-analysis of high-quality studies. Zhang SS; Ding T; Cui ZH; Lv Y; Jiang RA Medicine (Baltimore); 2019 Jan; 98(4):e14171. PubMed ID: 30681582 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Meta-analysis of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy, excluding robotic assisted versus open radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Marchand G; Masoud AT; Abdelsattar A; King A; Ulibarri H; Parise J; Arroyo A; Coriell C; Goetz S; Moir C; Moberly A; Govindan M Sci Rep; 2023 Jan; 13(1):273. PubMed ID: 36609438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Robotic radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Shazly SA; Murad MH; Dowdy SC; Gostout BS; Famuyide AO Gynecol Oncol; 2015 Aug; 138(2):457-71. PubMed ID: 26056752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Survival rate comparisons amongst cervical cancer patients treated with an open, robotic-assisted or laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: A five year experience. Mendivil AA; Rettenmaier MA; Abaid LN; Brown JV; Micha JP; Lopez KL; Goldstein BH Surg Oncol; 2016 Mar; 25(1):66-71. PubMed ID: 26409687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Robotic vs laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis. Zhou J; Xiong BH; Ma L; Cheng Y; Huang W; Zhao L Int J Med Robot; 2016 Mar; 12(1):145-54. PubMed ID: 25823530 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of conventional laparoscopy and robotic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A meta-analysis. Hao X; Han S; Wang Y J Cancer Res Ther; 2015 Nov; 11 Suppl():C258-64. PubMed ID: 26612449 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Efficacy and safety outcomes of robotic radical hysterectomy in Chinese older women with cervical cancer compared with laparoscopic radical hysterectomy. Luo C; Liu M; Li X BMC Womens Health; 2018 May; 18(1):61. PubMed ID: 29716555 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Laparoscopic versus robotic radical hysterectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: a case control study. Vizza E; Corrado G; Mancini E; Vici P; Sergi D; Baiocco E; Patrizi L; Saltari M; Pomati G; Cutillo G Eur J Surg Oncol; 2015 Jan; 41(1):142-7. PubMed ID: 24063966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Robotic-Assisted Radical Hysterectomy Results in Better Surgical Outcomes Compared With the Traditional Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Cervical Cancer. Nie JC; Yan AQ; Liu XS Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2017 Nov; 27(9):1990-1999. PubMed ID: 28858908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Robotic Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Population-Based Study of Adoption and Immediate Postoperative Outcomes in the United States. Piedimonte S; Czuzoj-Shulman N; Gotlieb W; Abenhaim HA J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2019; 26(3):551-557. PubMed ID: 30195078 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mini-laparoscopic versus robotic radical hysterectomy plus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in early cervical cancer patients. A multi-institutional study. Corrado G; Fanfani F; Ghezzi F; Fagotti A; Uccella S; Mancini E; Sperduti I; Stevenazzi G; Scambia G; Vizza E Eur J Surg Oncol; 2015 Jan; 41(1):136-41. PubMed ID: 25468748 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Robot-assisted versus open radical hysterectomy: A multi-institutional experience for early-stage cervical cancer. Sert BM; Boggess JF; Ahmad S; Jackson AL; Stavitzski NM; Dahl AA; Holloway RW Eur J Surg Oncol; 2016 Apr; 42(4):513-22. PubMed ID: 26843445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Robotic versus open radical hysterectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. Ko EM; Muto MG; Berkowitz RS; Feltmate CM Gynecol Oncol; 2008 Dec; 111(3):425-30. PubMed ID: 18929400 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Introduction of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: impact on complications, costs and oncologic outcome. Wallin E; Flöter Rådestad A; Falconer H Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2017 May; 96(5):536-542. PubMed ID: 28186616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Robotic versus laparoscopic radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients: a matched-case comparative study. Kim TH; Choi CH; Choi JK; Yoon A; Lee YY; Kim TJ; Lee JW; Bae DS; Kim BG Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2014 Oct; 24(8):1466-73. PubMed ID: 25207462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of the Long-Term Oncological Outcomes Between the Initial Learning Period of Robotic and the Experienced Period of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer. Chong GO; Lee YH; Lee HJ; Hong DG; Lee YS Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2018 Feb; 28(2):226-232. PubMed ID: 29303929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy vs. Robotic assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Marchand G; Taher Masoud A; Abdelsattar A; King A; Brazil G; Ulibarri H; Parise J; Arroyo A; Coriell C; Goetz S; Moir C; Baruelo G; Govindan M Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2023 Oct; 289():190-202. PubMed ID: 37690282 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Robotic Radical Hysterectomy Is Not Superior to Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy in Perioperative Urologic Complications: A Meta-Analysis of 23 Studies. Hwang JH; Kim BW; Kim SR; Kim JH J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020 Jan; 27(1):38-47. PubMed ID: 31315060 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Surgical outcomes of robotic radical hysterectomy using three robotic arms versus conventional multiport laparoscopy in patients with cervical cancer. Yim GW; Kim SW; Nam EJ; Kim S; Kim HJ; Kim YT Yonsei Med J; 2014 Sep; 55(5):1222-30. PubMed ID: 25048478 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]