320 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31637890)
1. Manchester Operation: An Effective Treatment for Uterine Prolapse Caused by True Cervical Elongation.
Park YJ; Kong MK; Lee J; Kim EH; Bai SW
Yonsei Med J; 2019 Nov; 60(11):1074-1080. PubMed ID: 31637890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Traction on the cervix in theatre before anterior repair: Does it tell us when to perform a concomitant hysterectomy?
Foon R; Agur W; Kingsly A; White P; Smith P
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2012 Feb; 160(2):205-9. PubMed ID: 22129812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study).
Schulten SFM; Enklaar RA; Kluivers KB; van Leijsen SAL; Jansen-van der Weide MC; Adang EMM; van Bavel J; van Dongen H; Gerritse MBE; van Gestel I; Malmberg GGA; Mouw RJC; van Rumpt-van de Geest DA; Spaans WA; van der Steen A; Stekelenburg J; Tiersma ESM; Verkleij-Hagoort AC; Vollebregt A; Wingen CBM; Weemhoff M; van Eijndhoven HWF
BMC Womens Health; 2019 Apr; 19(1):49. PubMed ID: 30940171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical Risk Factors for Uterine Cervical Elongation among Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Liu YY; Wang CL; Loo ZX; Lin KL; Long CY
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Sep; 18(17):. PubMed ID: 34501846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A blind spot: Manchester Fothergill operation for cervical elongation without uterine descensus.
Doganay M; Tugrul D; Ersak B; Kuntay Kokanalı M; Cavkaytar S; Seyfi Aksakal O
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2022 Apr; 271():83-87. PubMed ID: 35151961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy in the treatment of uterine prolapse: a review.
Tolstrup CK; Lose G; Klarskov N
Int Urogynecol J; 2017 Jan; 28(1):33-40. PubMed ID: 27485234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Manchester-Fothergill procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension: a matched historical cohort study.
Tolstrup CK; Husby KR; Lose G; Kopp TI; Viborg PH; Kesmodel US; Klarskov N
Int Urogynecol J; 2018 Mar; 29(3):431-440. PubMed ID: 29288346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Uterus preserving vaginal surgery versus vaginal hysterectomy for correction of female pelvic organ prolapse.
Iliev VN; Andonova IT
Pril (Makedon Akad Nauk Umet Odd Med Nauki); 2014; 35(1):243-7. PubMed ID: 24802202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Comparison outcomes of three surgical procedures in treatment of severe pelvic organ prolapse and analysis of risk factors for genital prolapse recurrence].
Hu CD; Chen YS; Yi XF; Ding JX; Feng WW; Yao LQ; Huang J; Zhang Y; Hu WG; Zhu ZL; Hua KQ
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2011 Feb; 46(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 21426765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Is cervical elongation associated with pelvic organ prolapse?
Berger MB; Ramanah R; Guire KE; DeLancey JO
Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Aug; 23(8):1095-103. PubMed ID: 22527546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Systematic classification of uterine cervical elongation in patients with pelvic organ prolapse.
Mothes AR; Mothes H; Fröber R; Radosa MP; Runnebaum IB
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 May; 200():40-4. PubMed ID: 26967345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Outcomes of Manchester procedure combined with high uterosacral ligament suspension for uterine prolapse.
Wang Q; Wu N; Li Y; Lin C; Xu Y; Chen X
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2023 Apr; 49(4):1273-1282. PubMed ID: 36734101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Laparoscopic high uterosacral ligament suspension combined with cervical amputation in treatment of women severe uterine prolapsed at child-bearing period].
Sun Z; Zhu L; Hu H; Lang J; Shi H; Gong X
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2014 Mar; 49(3):167-71. PubMed ID: 24820298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Risk factors for coexistence of cervical elongation in uterine prolapse.
Hsiao SM; Chang TC; Chen CH; Li YI; Shun CT; Lin HH
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2018 Oct; 229():94-97. PubMed ID: 30144728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Putting POP-Q to the test: does C - D = cervical length?
Williams KS; Rosen L; Pilkinton ML; Dhariwal L; Winkler HA
Int Urogynecol J; 2018 Jun; 29(6):881-885. PubMed ID: 28871354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Surgical treatment of primary uterine prolapse: a comparison of vaginal native tissue surgical techniques.
Husby KR; Larsen MD; Lose G; Klarskov N
Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Nov; 30(11):1887-1893. PubMed ID: 31053904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Recurrent surgery in uterine prolapse: A nationwide register study.
Brunes M; Johannesson U; Drca A; Bergman I; Söderberg M; Warnqvist A; Ek M
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2022 May; 101(5):532-541. PubMed ID: 35257371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcomes of vaginal hysterectomy combined with anterior and posterior colporrhaphy for pelvic organ prolapse: a single center retrospective study.
Kim JH; Lee SY; Chae HD; Shin YK; Lee SR; Kim SH
Obstet Gynecol Sci; 2022 Jan; 65(1):74-83. PubMed ID: 34736315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cervical cancer after the Manchester procedure: a nationwide cohort study.
Husby KR; Gradel KO; Klarskov N
Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Aug; 34(8):1837-1842. PubMed ID: 36763147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of cervical length measured by POP-Q C-D and MRI: Why is POP-Q C-D not accurate?
Tang L; Liao K; Jiang W; Feng J; Liu P; Chen C
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 Jan; 244():76-80. PubMed ID: 31760266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
