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.
2. Minimally Invasive Redo Mitral Valve Replacement Using a Robotic-Assisted Approach. Patel H; Lewis CTP; Stephens RL; Angelillo M; Sibley DH Innovations (Phila); 2017; 12(5):375-377. PubMed ID: 29023349 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative Analysis of Perioperative and Mid-Term Results of TECAB and MIDCAB for Revascularization of Anterior Wall. Kofler M; Schachner T; Reinstadler SJ; Stastny L; Dumfarth J; Wiedemann D; Feuchtner G; Friedrich G; Bonatti J; Bonaros N Innovations (Phila); 2017; 12(3):207-213. PubMed ID: 28542076 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cost and Outcome of Minimally Invasive Techniques for Coronary Surgery Using Robotic Technology. Pasrija C; Kon ZN; Ghoreishi M; Lehr EJ; Gammie JS; Griffith BP; Bonatti J; Taylor BS Innovations (Phila); 2018; 13(4):282-286. PubMed ID: 30130263 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Hybrid Minimally Invasive Approach for Combined Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease and Severe Aortic Stenosis. Pirelli L; Patel NC; Scheinerman JS; Brinster DR; Hemli JM; Basman C; Kliger CA Innovations (Phila); 2020; 15(2):131-137. PubMed ID: 31893954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Hybrid approach for percutaneous mitral valve repair (MitraClip®) followed by minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in a patient with a high risk constellation. Öner A; Alozie A; Dohmen PM J Card Surg; 2021 Nov; 36(11):4419-4422. PubMed ID: 34490951 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Minimally Invasive CABG or Hybrid Coronary Revascularization for Multivessel Coronary Diseases: Which Is Best? A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis. Guan Z; Zhang Z; Gu K; Wang H; Lin J; Zhou W; Wan F Heart Surg Forum; 2019 Dec; 22(6):E493-E502. PubMed ID: 31895036 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Advanced hybrid closed chest revascularization: an innovative strategy for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease†. Bonaros N; Schachner T; Kofler M; Lehr E; Lee J; Vesely M; Zimrin D; Feuchtner G; Friedrich G; Bonatti J Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2014 Dec; 46(6):e94-102; discussion e102. PubMed ID: 25256825 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Comparison between Minimally Invasive Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery and Conventional Bypass Grafting Surgery in Proximal LAD Lesion. Ezelsoy M; Caynak B; Bayram M; Oral K; Bayramoglu Z; Sagbas E; Aytekın V; Akpınar B Heart Surg Forum; 2015 Apr; 18(2):E042-6. PubMed ID: 25924029 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Pain and the Quality of Life Following Robotic Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery. Ezelsoy M; Oral K; Caynak B; Bayramoglu Z; Akpinar B Heart Surg Forum; 2016 Aug; 19(4):E165-8. PubMed ID: 27585193 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A New Frontier: No Working Port for Robotic Mitral Valve Repair. Rosen JL; Yost CC; Prochno KW; Komlo CM; Mandel JL; Wu M; Guy TS Innovations (Phila); 2023; 18(2):200-203. PubMed ID: 37036096 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Short-term follow-up results of hybrid coronary revascularization by robotic coronary artery bypass grafting and stent implantation]. Yang M; Gao C; Liu S; Wu Y; Xiao C; Wang R Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao; 2015 Aug; 35(8):1166-9. PubMed ID: 26277515 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Robotic Septal Myectomy Without Anterior Leaflet Incision during Mitral Valve Repair. Onan B; Kadirogullari E; Kahraman Z; Sen O Innovations (Phila); 2019 Jun; 14(3):281-285. PubMed ID: 31050323 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]