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 *

873 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32276941)

  • 21. Total laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in stage IA2-IB1 cervical cancer: disease recurrence and survival comparison.
    Toptas T; Simsek T
    J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2014 Jun; 24(6):373-8. PubMed ID: 24742012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (type II-III) with pelvic lymphadenectomy in early invasive cervical cancer.
    Gil-Moreno A; Puig O; Pérez-Benavente MA; Díaz B; Vergés R; De la Torre J; Martínez-Palones JM; Xercavins J
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2005; 12(2):113-20. PubMed ID: 15904613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of oncological outcomes and major complications between laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 cervical cancer with a tumour size less than 2 cm.
    Li Z; Chen C; Liu P; Duan H; Liu M; Xu Y; Li P; Zhang W; Jiang H; Bin X; Lang J
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2021 Aug; 47(8):2125-2133. PubMed ID: 33781626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Quality of life in patients with cervical cancer after open versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy (LACC): a secondary outcome of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.
    Frumovitz M; Obermair A; Coleman RL; Pareja R; Lopez A; Ribero R; Isla D; Rendon G; Bernardini MQ; Buda A; Moretti-Marquez R; Zevallos A; Vieira MA; Zhu T; Land RP; Nicklin J; Asher R; Robledo KP; Gebski V; Ramirez PT
    Lancet Oncol; 2020 Jun; 21(6):851-860. PubMed ID: 32502445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Preoperative Conization and Risk of Recurrence in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Multicenter Study.
    Casarin J; Bogani G; Papadia A; Ditto A; Pinelli C; Garzon S; Donadello N; Laganà AS; Cromi A; Mueller M; Raspagliesi F; Ghezzi F
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Jan; 28(1):117-123. PubMed ID: 32320800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for FIGO stage IB and IIA cervical cancer with tumor diameter of 3 cm or greater.
    Kong TW; Chang SJ; Lee J; Paek J; Ryu HS
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2014 Feb; 24(2):280-8. PubMed ID: 24407571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Open versus laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection in early stage cervical cancer: no difference in surgical or disease outcome.
    van de Lande J; von Mensdorff-Pouilly S; Lettinga RG; Piek JM; Verheijen RH
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2012 Jan; 22(1):107-14. PubMed ID: 21857347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Patterns of recurrence after laparoscopic versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with cervical cancer: a propensity-matched analysis.
    Bogani G; Ghezzi F; Chiva L; Gisone B; Pinelli C; Dell'Acqua A; Casarin J; Ditto A; Raspagliesi F
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Jul; 30(7):987-992. PubMed ID: 32448809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. [Long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus abdominal surgery in stage Ⅰa1 （LVSI
    Chen CL; Kang S; Chen BL; Yang Y; Guo JX; Hao M; Wang WL; Ji M; Sun LX; Wang L; Liang WT; Wang SG; Li WL; Fan HJ; Liu P; Lang JH
    Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2020 Sep; 55(9):589-599. PubMed ID: 32957747
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Long-term oncological outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A retrospective, single-institutional study in the wake of the LACC trial.
    Kanno K; Andou M; Yanai S; Toeda M; Nimura R; Ichikawa F; Teishikata Y; Shirane T; Sakate S; Kihira T; Hamasaki Y; Sawada M; Shirane A; Ota Y
    J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2019 Dec; 45(12):2425-2434. PubMed ID: 31502349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Effect of modified radical laparoscopic hysterectomy versus open radical hysterectomy on short-term clinical outcomes in early-stage cervical cancer: a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial.
    Lv X; Ding B; Xu J; Shen Y
    World J Surg Oncol; 2023 Jun; 21(1):167. PubMed ID: 37270549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparative study of tumor
    Zhao J; Liu Q; Jiang D; Chen T; Meng S; Shu C
    Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2023 Nov; 48(11):1686-1695. PubMed ID: 38432859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison between laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for stage IB1 and tumor size <2 cm cervical cancer with visible or invisible tumors: a multicentre retrospective study.
    Li P; Chen L; Ni Y; Liu J; Li D; Guo J; Liu Z; Jin S; Xu Y; Li Z; Wang L; Bin X; Lang J; Liu P; Chen C
    J Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Mar; 32(2):e17. PubMed ID: 33470062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison between robot-assisted radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A multicentre retrospective study.
    Chen B; Ji M; Li P; Liu P; Zou W; Zhao Z; Qu B; Li Z; Bin X; Lang J; Wang H; Chen C
    Gynecol Oncol; 2020 May; 157(2):429-436. PubMed ID: 32067814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Oncologic results and surgical morbidity of laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in the treatment of FIGO stage IB cervical cancer: long-term follow-up.
    Park NY; Chong GO; Hong DG; Cho YL; Park IS; Lee YS
    Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2011 Feb; 21(2):355-62. PubMed ID: 21270616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Survival of patients with early-stage cervical cancer after abdominal or laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: a nationwide cohort study and literature review.
    Wenzel HHB; Smolders RGV; Beltman JJ; Lambrechts S; Trum HW; Yigit R; Zusterzeel PLM; Zweemer RP; Mom CH; Bekkers RLM; Lemmens VEPP; Nijman HW; Van der Aa MA
    Eur J Cancer; 2020 Jul; 133():14-21. PubMed ID: 32422504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Comparison of abdominal and minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in patients with early stage cervical cancer.
    Kim SI; Lee J; Hong J; Lee SJ; Park DC; Yoon JH
    Int J Med Sci; 2021; 18(5):1312-1317. PubMed ID: 33526992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 44.