250 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31788997)
1. Selection criteria and colpotomic approach for safe minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer.
Kong TW; Son JH; Paek J; Chang SJ; Ryu HS
J Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Jan; 31(1):e7. PubMed ID: 31788997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Patterns of recurrence and survival after abdominal versus laparoscopic/robotic radical hysterectomy in patients with early cervical cancer.
Kong TW; Chang SJ; Piao X; Paek J; Lee Y; Lee EJ; Chun M; Ryu HS
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2016 Jan; 42(1):77-86. PubMed ID: 26554751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Laparotomic radical hysterectomy versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy using vaginal colpotomy for the management of stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.
Yang EJ; Kim NR; Lee AJ; Shim SH; Lee SJ
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Feb; 101(8):e28911. PubMed ID: 35212297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Survival after minimally invasive surgery in early cervical cancer: is the intra-uterine manipulator to blame?
Nica A; Kim SR; Gien LT; Covens A; Bernardini MQ; Bouchard-Fortier G; Kupets R; May T; Vicus D; Laframboise S; Hogen L; Cusimano MC; Ferguson SE
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Dec; 30(12):1864-1870. PubMed ID: 33037109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer.
Chiva L; Zanagnolo V; Querleu D; Martin-Calvo N; Arévalo-Serrano J; Căpîlna ME; Fagotti A; Kucukmetin A; Mom C; Chakalova G; Aliyev S; Malzoni M; Narducci F; Arencibia O; Raspagliesi F; Toptas T; Cibula D; Kaidarova D; Meydanli MM; Tavares M; Golub D; Perrone AM; Poka R; Tsolakidis D; Vujić G; Jedryka MA; Zusterzeel PLM; Beltman JJ; Goffin F; Haidopoulos D; Haller H; Jach R; Yezhova I; Berlev I; Bernardino M; Bharathan R; Lanner M; Maenpaa MM; Sukhin V; Feron JG; Fruscio R; Kukk K; Ponce J; Minguez JA; Vázquez-Vicente D; Castellanos T; Chacon E; Alcazar JL;
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Sep; 30(9):1269-1277. PubMed ID: 32788262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Does the Use of a Uterine Manipulator or Intracorporeal Colpotomy Confer an Inferior Prognosis in Minimally Invasive Surgery-Treated Early-stage Cervical Cancer?
Wang R; Hu Y; Xia H; Zhu X
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2023 Feb; 30(2):156-163. PubMed ID: 36410659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Protective Maneuver to Avoid Tumor Spillage during Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy: Vaginal Cuff Closure.
Lago V; Tiermes M; Padilla-Iserte P; Matute L; Gurrea M; Domingo S
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Feb; 28(2):174-175. PubMed ID: 32540498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Effects of colpotomic approaches on prognosis and recurrence sites of stage Ⅰa2-Ⅱa2 cervical cancer after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy].
Zhou D; Li YD; Ling KJ; Wang RW; Wang YZ; Tang S; Liang ZQ
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2023 Jan; 58(1):49-59. PubMed ID: 36720615
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.
Ramirez PT; Frumovitz M; Pareja R; Lopez A; Vieira M; Ribeiro R; Buda A; Yan X; Shuzhong Y; Chetty N; Isla D; Tamura M; Zhu T; Robledo KP; Gebski V; Asher R; Behan V; Nicklin JL; Coleman RL; Obermair A
N Engl J Med; 2018 Nov; 379(20):1895-1904. PubMed ID: 30380365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Value of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR in predicting parametrial invasion in cervical stromal ring focally disrupted stage IB-IIA cervical cancers.
Song J; Hu Q; Ma Z; Zhang J; Chen T
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2019 Sep; 44(9):3166-3174. PubMed ID: 31377834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prognostic factors influencing pelvic, extra-pelvic, and intraperitoneal recurrences in lymph node-negative early-stage cervical cancer patients following radical hysterectomy.
Kong TW; Son JH; Paek J; Chang SJ; Ryu HS
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2020 Sep; 252():94-99. PubMed ID: 32590168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Laparoendoscopic Single-site Radical Hysterectomy with Vaginal Closure and without Uterine Manipulator for FIGO IB1 Cervical Cancer.
Chen S; Zheng Y; Tong L; Zhao X; Chen L; Wang Y
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020; 27(7):1471-1472. PubMed ID: 31926301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Preoperatively Assessable Clinical and Pathological Risk Factors for Parametrial Involvement in Surgically Treated FIGO Stage IB-IIA Cervical Cancer.
Canaz E; Ozyurek ES; Erdem B; Aldikactioglu Talmac M; Yildiz Ozaydin I; Akbayir O; Numanoglu C; Ulker V
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2017 Oct; 27(8):1722-1728. PubMed ID: 28617687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of survival outcomes between minimally invasive surgery and conventional open surgery for radical hysterectomy as primary treatment in patients with stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer.
Kim SI; Cho JH; Seol A; Kim YI; Lee M; Kim HS; Chung HH; Kim JW; Park NH; Song YS
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Apr; 153(1):3-12. PubMed ID: 30642625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Postoperative nomogram for the prediction of disease-free survival in lymph node-negative stage I-IIA cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy.
Gülseren V; Kocaer M; Çakır İ; Özdemir İA; Sancı M; Güngördük K
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2020 Jul; 40(5):699-704. PubMed ID: 31607197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Lymph Node Ratio Is a Strong Prognostic Factor in Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Undergoing Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy.
Kim SI; Kim TH; Lee M; Kim HS; Chung HH; Lee TS; Jeon HW; Kim JW; Park NH; Song YS
Yonsei Med J; 2021 Mar; 62(3):231-239. PubMed ID: 33635013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Is minimally invasive radical surgery safe for patients with cervical cancer ≤2 cm in size? (MISAFE): Gynecologic Oncology Research Investigators coLLborAtion study (GORILLA-1003).
Kong TW; Kim J; Son JH; Lee AJ; Yang EJ; Shim SH; Kim NK; Kim Y; Suh DH; Hwang DW; Park SJ; Kim HS; Lee YY; Yoo JG; Lee SJ; Chang SJ
Gynecol Oncol; 2023 Sep; 176():122-129. PubMed ID: 37515926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
