217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35180514)
1. Infected pelvic hematoma following vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension for treatment of apical prolapse.
Chill HH; Ben Porat L; Winer J; Moss NP; Cohen A; Shveiky D
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2022 Apr; 271():97-101. PubMed ID: 35180514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Vaginal Colposuspension Using the Uphold Lite Mesh System versus Transvaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Apical Prolapse: A Comparative Study.
Chill HH; Navon I; Reuveni-Salzman A; Cohen A; Dick A; Shveiky D
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Oct; 28(10):1759-1764. PubMed ID: 33713835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy vs Total Vaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Anterior and Apical Prolapse: Surgical Outcome and Patient Satisfaction.
Haj-Yahya R; Chill HH; Levin G; Reuveni-Salzman A; Shveiky D
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020 Jan; 27(1):88-93. PubMed ID: 30802607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Absorbable versus Permanent Suture for Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Apical Prolapse.
Chill HH; Cohen-Milun G; Cohen A; Moss NP; Winer JD; Shveiky D
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2022 Jun; 29(6):784-790. PubMed ID: 35283321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Characteristics associated with composite surgical failure over 5 years of women in a randomized trial of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.
Richter HE; Sridhar A; Nager CW; Komesu YM; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Rardin C; Visco A; Mazloomdoost D; Thomas S;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Jan; 228(1):63.e1-63.e16. PubMed ID: 35931131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. High Uterosacral Ligaments Suspension for Post-Hysterectomy Vaginal Vault Prolapse Repair.
Barba M; Cola A; Melocchi T; De Vicari D; Costa C; Volontè S; Sandullo L; Frigerio M
Medicina (Kaunas); 2024 Feb; 60(2):. PubMed ID: 38399607
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial.
Schulten SFM; Detollenaere RJ; Stekelenburg J; IntHout J; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HWF
BMJ; 2019 Sep; 366():l5149. PubMed ID: 31506252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous hysteropexy or vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension.
Schulten SF; Detollenaere RJ; IntHout J; Kluivers KB; Van Eijndhoven HW
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Aug; 227(2):252.e1-252.e9. PubMed ID: 35439530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Recurrence of vaginal prolapse after total vaginal hysterectomy with concurrent vaginal uterosacral ligament suspension: comparison between normal-weight and overweight women.
Rappa C; Saccone G
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Nov; 215(5):601.e1-601.e4. PubMed ID: 27342042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of Vaginal Mesh Hysteropexy vs Vaginal Hysterectomy With Uterosacral Ligament Suspension on Treatment Failure in Women With Uterovaginal Prolapse: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Nager CW; Visco AG; Richter HE; Rardin CR; Rogers RG; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Paraiso MFR; Mazloomdoost D; Grey S; Sridhar A; Wallace D;
JAMA; 2019 Sep; 322(11):1054-1065. PubMed ID: 31529008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Effectiveness of vaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension for treatment of recurrent pelvic organ prolapse].
Shen WJ; Lu YX; Liu X; Liu JX; Duan L; Zhang YH; Niu K; Wang WY; Qin L; Zhang XL
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2019 Apr; 54(4):232-238. PubMed ID: 31006188
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Long-term reoperation risk after apical prolapse repair in female pelvic reconstructive surgery.
Shah NM; Berger AA; Zhuang Z; Tan-Kim J; Menefee SA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Aug; 227(2):306.e1-306.e16. PubMed ID: 35654112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with suspension of the uterosacral ligaments in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial.
Detollenaere RJ; den Boon J; Stekelenburg J; IntHout J; Vierhout ME; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HW
BMJ; 2015 Jul; 351():h3717. PubMed ID: 26206451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effect of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension vs Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation With or Without Perioperative Behavioral Therapy for Pelvic Organ Vaginal Prolapse on Surgical Outcomes and Prolapse Symptoms at 5 Years in the OPTIMAL Randomized Clinical Trial.
Jelovsek JE; Barber MD; Brubaker L; Norton P; Gantz M; Richter HE; Weidner A; Menefee S; Schaffer J; Pugh N; Meikle S;
JAMA; 2018 Apr; 319(15):1554-1565. PubMed ID: 29677302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Surgical outcomes in patients aged 70 years and older following uterosacral ligament suspension: a comparative study.
Chill HH; Dick A; Cohen A; Ryvkin I; Rosenbloom JI; Reuveni-Salzman A; Shveiky D
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2023 Jun; 307(6):2033-2040. PubMed ID: 36840767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Abdominal and vaginal pelvic support with concomitant hysterectomy for uterovaginal pelvic prolapse: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.
Alfahmy A; Mahran A; Conroy B; Brewka RR; Ibrahim M; Sheyn D; El-Nashar SA; Hijaz A
Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Aug; 32(8):2021-2031. PubMed ID: 34050771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [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]
18. Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Hysterectomy and Apical Suspension of the Vaginal Cuff to the Uterosacral Ligament.
Lowenstein L; Baekelandt J; Paz Y; Lauterbach R; Matanes E
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2019; 26(6):1015. PubMed ID: 30980991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [A five-year analysis of effect on transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension with or without native-tissue repair for middle compartment defect].
Zhang YH; Lu YX; Liu X; Liu JX; Shen WJ; Zhao Y; Niu K; Wang WY
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2019 Jul; 54(7):445-451. PubMed ID: 31365956
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [Long-term effectiveness of transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension].
Duan L; Lu YX; Shen WJ; Liu X; Liu JX; Zhang YH; Ge J; Zhao Y; Niu K; Wang WY
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Jun; 52(6):363-368. PubMed ID: 28647957
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
