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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31288006)

  • 1. Impact of surgical approach on oncologic outcomes in women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer.
    Cusimano MC; Baxter NN; Gien LT; Moineddin R; Liu N; Dossa F; Willows K; Ferguson SE
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Dec; 221(6):619.e1-619.e24. PubMed ID: 31288006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.
    Melamed A; Margul DJ; Chen L; Keating NL; Del Carmen MG; Yang J; Seagle BL; Alexander A; Barber EL; Rice LW; Wright JD; Kocherginsky M; Shahabi S; Rauh-Hain JA
    N Engl J Med; 2018 Nov; 379(20):1905-1914. PubMed ID: 30379613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Efficacy of different surgical approaches in the clinical and survival outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical cancer: protocol of a phase III multicentre randomised controlled trial in China.
    Chao X; Li L; Wu M; Ma S; Tan X; Zhong S; Lang J; Cheng A; Li W
    BMJ Open; 2019 Jul; 9(7):e029055. PubMed ID: 31362966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Robotic versus vaginal radical trachelectomy for reproductive-aged patients with early-stage cervical carcinoma: A multi-center cohort study.
    Nica A; Benseler A; Parbhakar A; Fortin LT; Heyns M; Lee M; Covens A; Plante M; May T
    Gynecol Oncol; 2024 Jun; 185():95-100. PubMed ID: 38377763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy for early stage cervical cancer: A propensity score-matched cohort study.
    Dai D; Huang H; Feng Y; Wan T; Liu Z; Tong C; Liu J
    Cancer Med; 2020 Dec; 9(24):9236-9245. PubMed ID: 33236825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of survival outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy and direct surgery in IB2/IIA2 cervical adenocarcinoma: a retrospective study.
    Ouyang P; Cai J; Gui L; Liu S; Wu NY; Wang J
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2020 May; 301(5):1247-1255. PubMed ID: 32221709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with protective colpotomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Song YL; Li RZ; Feng BJ; Lu YH; Wang LF; Wang ZY; Pei KG; Sun LF; Li R
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2024 Apr; 50(4):108240. PubMed ID: 38457858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. SUCCOR morbidity: complications in minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in early cervical cancer.
    Vázquez-Vicente D; Boria F; Castellanos T; Gutierrez M; Chacon E; Manzour N; Minguez JA; Martin-Calvo N; Alcazar JL; Chiva L;
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2024 Feb; 34(2):203-208. PubMed ID: 38669163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. LACC Trial: Final Analysis on Overall Survival Comparing Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.
    Ramirez PT; Robledo KP; Frumovitz M; Pareja R; Ribeiro R; Lopez A; Yan X; Isla D; Moretti R; Bernardini MQ; Gebski V; Asher R; Behan V; Coleman RL; Obermair A
    J Clin Oncol; 2024 Aug; 42(23):2741-2746. PubMed ID: 38810208
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Survival associated with extent of radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: a subanalysis of the Surveillance in Cervical CANcer (SCCAN) collaborative study.
    Bizzarri N; Querleu D; Dostálek L; van Lonkhuijzen LRCW; Giannarelli D; Lopez A; Salehi S; Ayhan A; Kim SH; Ortiz DI; Klat J; Landoni F; Pareja R; Manchanda R; Kosťun J; Ramirez PT; Meydanli MM; Odetto D; Laky R; Zapardiel I; Weinberger V; Dos Reis R; Pedone Anchora L; Amaro K; Akilli H; Abu-Rustum NR; Salcedo-Hernández RA; Javůrková V; Mom CH; Scambia G; Falconer H; Cibula D
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Oct; 229(4):428.e1-428.e12. PubMed ID: 37336255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications.
    Mehta A; Xu T; Hutfless S; Makary MA; Sinno AK; Tanner EJ; Stone RL; Wang K; Fader AN
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 May; 216(5):497.e1-497.e10. PubMed ID: 28034651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of the clinical outcomes of patients with stage IA-IIA2 cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma after radical hysterectomy: A propensity score-matched real-world analysis.
    Liang C; Su G; Sun L; Zhao H; Liu P; Chen C
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2024 Jul; 166(1):272-281. PubMed ID: 38287671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Practice patterns and complications of hysterectomy for invasive cervical cancer after the Laparoscopic Approach to Cervical Cancer trial.
    Schivardi G; Casarin J; Habermann EB; Bews KA; Langstraat CL; Cliby W; Cucinella G; De Vitis LA; Ramirez PT; Aletti GD; Mariani A; Multinu F
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2024 Jan; 230(1):69.e1-69.e10. PubMed ID: 37690596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy based on open state with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.
    Zhao X; Liu Y; Niu J; Shi Y
    Trials; 2024 Jul; 25(1):471. PubMed ID: 38992720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Prognostic significance of adenocarcinoma histology in women with cervical cancer.
    Galic V; Herzog TJ; Lewin SN; Neugut AI; Burke WM; Lu YS; Hershman DL; Wright JD
    Gynecol Oncol; 2012 May; 125(2):287-91. PubMed ID: 22266551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of survival outcome of open, total laparoscopic, and laparoscopy-assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy for stage IB2 cervical cancer patients: A multicenter retrospective study.
    Yoon HJ; Kwon BS; Rho HJ; Lee TH; Jeong DH; Kim KH; Suh DS; Song YJ
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2024 Mar; 103(10):e37426. PubMed ID: 38457577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of survival outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic radical hysterectomies for early-stage cervical cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis.
    Hwang JH; Kim B
    J Gynecol Oncol; 2024 Jan; 35(1):e9. PubMed ID: 37857564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Nationwide Introduction of Minimally Invasive Robotic Surgery for Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer and Its Association With Severe Complications.
    Jørgensen SL; Mogensen O; Wu C; Lund K; Iachina M; Korsholm M; Jensen PT
    JAMA Surg; 2019 Jun; 154(6):530-538. PubMed ID: 30810740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Retrospective Analysis of Cervical Cancer Treatment Outcomes: Ten Years of Experience with the Vaginal Assisted Radical Laparoscopic Hysterectomy VARLH.
    Wojdat R; Malanowska E
    Biomed Res Int; 2022; 2022():5163886. PubMed ID: 35047636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Simple versus Radical Hysterectomy in Women with Low-Risk Cervical Cancer.
    Plante M; Kwon JS; Ferguson S; Samouëlian V; Ferron G; Maulard A; de Kroon C; Van Driel W; Tidy J; Williamson K; Mahner S; Kommoss S; Goffin F; Tamussino K; Eyjólfsdóttir B; Kim JW; Gleeson N; Brotto L; Tu D; Shepherd LE; ;
    N Engl J Med; 2024 Feb; 390(9):819-829. PubMed ID: 38416430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.