254 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32903313)
1. Survival After Minimally Invasive vs. Open Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.
Wang Y; Li B; Ren F; Song Z; Ouyang L; Liu K
Front Oncol; 2020; 10():1236. PubMed ID: 32903313
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Survival After Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Nitecki R; Ramirez PT; Frumovitz M; Krause KJ; Tergas AI; Wright JD; Rauh-Hain JA; Melamed A
JAMA Oncol; 2020 Jul; 6(7):1019-1027. PubMed ID: 32525511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Surveillance of radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer in the early experienced period of minimally invasive surgery in Japan.
Ohta T; Nagase S; Okui Y; Enomoto T; Yamagami W; Mikami M; Tokunaga H; Ino K; Ushijima K; Shozu M; Tashiro H; Mandai M; Miyamoto S; Morishige KI; Yoshida Y; Yoshino K; Saito T; Kobayashi E; Kobayashi H; Takekuma M; Terai Y; Fujii T; Kanao H; Aoki D; Katabuchi H; Yaegashi N
Int J Clin Oncol; 2021 Dec; 26(12):2318-2330. PubMed ID: 34435284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Efficacy and safety analysis of non-radical surgery for early-stage cervical cancer (IA2 ~ IB1): a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zeng S; Xiao S; Xu Y; Yang P; Hu C; Jin X; Liu L
Front Med (Lausanne); 2024; 11():1337752. PubMed ID: 38745744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. SUCCOR cone study: conization before radical hysterectomy.
Chacon E; Manzour N; Zanagnolo V; Querleu D; Núñez-Córdoba JM; Martin-Calvo N; Căpîlna ME; Fagotti A; Kucukmetin A; Mom C; Chakalova G; Shamistan A; Gil Moreno A; 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; Boria F; Alcazar JL; Chiva L; ;
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2022 Feb; 32(2):117-124. PubMed ID: 35039455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical carcinoma and tumor size
Nasioudis D; Albright BB; Ko EM; Haggerty AF; Giuntoli Ii RL; Kim SH; Morgan MA; Latif NA
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2021 Jul; 31(7):983-990. PubMed ID: 34016701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Open Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy in Cervical Cancer: The CIRCOL Group Study.
Baiocchi G; Ribeiro R; Dos Reis R; Falcao DF; Lopes A; Costa RLR; Pinto GLS; Vieira M; Kumagai LY; Faloppa CC; Mantoan H; Badiglian-Filho L; Tsunoda AT; Foiato TF; Andrade CEMC; Palmeira LO; Gonçalves BT; Zanvettor PH
Ann Surg Oncol; 2022 Feb; 29(2):1151-1160. PubMed ID: 34545531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Pattern of relapse in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer after radical hysterectomy as primary treatment. Minimally invasive surgery vs. open approach. Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Manzour N; Núñez-Cordoba JM; Chiva L; Chacón E; Boria F; Vara-García J; Rodriguez-Velandia YP; Minguez JA; Alcazar JL
Gynecol Oncol; 2022 Feb; 164(2):455-460. PubMed ID: 34848071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Hazard Ratio Analysis of Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for IA1 With LVSI-IIA2 Cervical Cancer: Identifying the Possible Contraindications of Laparoscopic Surgery for Cervical Cancer.
Li P; Liu P; Yang Y; Wang L; Liu J; Bin X; Lang J; Chen C
Front Oncol; 2020; 10():1002. PubMed ID: 32733796
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Laparoscopic vs. Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.
Wang W; Li L; Wu M; Ma S; Tan X; Zhong S
Front Oncol; 2019; 9():1331. PubMed ID: 31828044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy without using uterine manipulator for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Li RZ; Sun LF; Li R; Wang HJ
BJOG; 2023 Jan; 130(2):176-183. PubMed ID: 36331008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis.
Zhang M; Dai W; Si Y; Shi Y; Li X; Jiang K; Shen J; Ying L
Front Oncol; 2021; 11():762921. PubMed ID: 35141141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Survival outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: A single-center retrospective study.
Yeon Choi H; Park JW
Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Apr; 102(17):e33702. PubMed ID: 37115056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Peritoneal carcinomatosis after minimally invasive surgery versus open radical hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Hoegl J; Viveros-Carreño D; Palacios T; Gallego-Ardila A; Rauh-Hain JA; Estrada EE; Noll F; Krause K; Baiocchi G; Minig L; Grillo-Ardila CF; Pareja R
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2022 Dec; 32(12):1497-1504. PubMed ID: 36351746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A meta-analysis of survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer: center-associated factors matter.
Sun S; Cai J; Li R; Wang Y; Zhao J; Huang Y; Xu L; Yang Q; Wang Z
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2022 Sep; 306(3):623-637. PubMed ID: 35061066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Minimally invasive surgery and abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: A meta-analysis.
Yu Y; Deng T; Gu S
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2022 May; 157(2):255-264. PubMed ID: 34165795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy: an analysis of oncologic outcomes from Hospital Italiano (Argentina).
Odetto D; Puga MC; Saadi J; Noll F; Perrotta M
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2019 Jun; 29(5):863-868. PubMed ID: 31155517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
