150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30807405)
1. A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Restorelle Y Mesh and Flat Mesh for Laparoscopic and Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy.
Ferrando CA; Paraiso MFR
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2019; 25(2):83-87. PubMed ID: 30807405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A prospective randomized trial comparing Restorelle® Y mesh and flat mesh for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: 24-month outcomes.
Ferrando CA; Paraiso MFR
Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Jun; 32(6):1565-1570. PubMed ID: 33471144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.
Tan-Kim J; Nager CW; Grimes CL; Luber KM; Lukacz ES; Brown HW; Ferrante KL; Dyer KY; Kirby AC; Menefee SA
Int Urogynecol J; 2015 May; 26(5):649-56. PubMed ID: 25421934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy.
Unger CA; Paraiso MF; Jelovsek JE; Barber MD; Ridgeway B
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Nov; 211(5):547.e1-8. PubMed ID: 25088866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Anchor vs suture for the attachment of vaginal mesh in a robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a randomized clinical trial.
Berger AA; Tan-Kim J; Menefee SA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Aug; 223(2):258.e1-258.e8. PubMed ID: 32413431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site compared with robotic multi-port sacrocolpopexy for apical compartment prolapse.
Matanes E; Boulus S; Lauterbach R; Amit A; Weiner Z; Lowenstein L
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Apr; 222(4):358.e1-358.e11. PubMed ID: 31589864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Anatomical outcomes 1 year after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in patients with and without a uterus at a high risk of recurrence: a randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/cervicopexy and anterior vaginal mesh.
Bataller E; Ros C; Anglès S; Gallego M; Espuña-Pons M; Carmona F
Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Apr; 30(4):545-555. PubMed ID: 29987345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Subjective and objective results 1 year after robotic sacrocolpopexy using a lightweight Y-mesh.
Culligan PJ; Gurshumov E; Lewis C; Priestley JL; Komar J; Shah N; Salamon CG
Int Urogynecol J; 2014 Jun; 25(6):731-5. PubMed ID: 24264283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study.
Gutman RE; Rardin CR; Sokol ER; Matthews C; Park AJ; Iglesia CB; Geoffrion R; Sokol AI; Karram M; Cundiff GW; Blomquist JL; Barber MD
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 216(1):38.e1-38.e11. PubMed ID: 27596620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Long-term Anatomical and Functional Results of Robot-Assisted Pelvic Floor Surgery for the Management of Multicompartment Prolapse: A Prospective Study.
van Zanten F; van der Schans EM; Consten ECJ; Verheijen PM; Lenters E; Broeders IAMJ; Schraffordt Koops SE
Dis Colon Rectum; 2020 Sep; 63(9):1293-1301. PubMed ID: 32618619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A review of the current status of laparoscopic and robot-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.
Lee RK; Mottrie A; Payne CK; Waltregny D
Eur Urol; 2014 Jun; 65(6):1128-37. PubMed ID: 24433811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Two-year anatomical and functional outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy using light-weight Y shaped mesh for post hysterectomy vaginal prolapse.
Fayyad A; Harris R; Ibrahim S
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2022 Mar; 270():139-143. PubMed ID: 35051826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Transvaginal Versus Transabdominal Placement of Synthetic Mesh at Time of Sacrocolpopexy.
Nosti PA; Carter CM; Sokol AI; Tefera E; Iglesia CB; Park AJ; Gutman RE
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2016; 22(3):151-5. PubMed ID: 26571429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The 26-Minute Laparoscopic Sacral Colpopexy: Do We Really Need Robotic Technology?
Miklos JR; Moore RD
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2015; 22(5):712. PubMed ID: 25769671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Uterosacral Ligament Suspension Versus Robotic Sacrocolpopexy for Treatment of Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Smith BC; Crisp CC; Kleeman SD; Yook E; Pauls RN
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2019; 25(2):93-98. PubMed ID: 30807407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with autologous fascia lata: technique and initial outcomes.
Scott VCS; Oliver JL; Raz S; Kim JH
Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Nov; 30(11):1965-1971. PubMed ID: 30707257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Analysis of Robotic Procedural Times Using Colpassist Versus End-to-End Anastomosis Sizer for Robotic-Assisted Sacrocolpopexy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Brueseke T; Matthews C; Willis-Gray M; Knight S; Nieto ML; Geller E
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2019; 25(2):e12-e17. PubMed ID: 30807429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The use of a xenogenic barrier to prevent mesh erosion with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.
Ross JW
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2007; 14(4):470-4. PubMed ID: 17630165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
