130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35728603)
21. Safety of salpingectomy at time of delivery.
Parikh P; Kim S; Hathcock M; Torbenson VE; Raju R
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2021 Sep; 34(17):2765-2770. PubMed ID: 31544559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Applicability, Safety, and Efficiency of Salpingectomy versus Electrocoagulation and Laparoscopic Tubal Section in Ambulatory.
Pereira JMA; Trocado VFB; Gomes SMS; Carlos-Alves M; Carvalho A; Pinheiro PA
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet; 2022 Sep; 44(9):866-870. PubMed ID: 36037814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Frequency and characteristics associated with opportunistic salpingectomy at cesarean delivery: A retrospective chart review.
Desravines N; Brenner T; Venkatesh K; Stuart G
Contraception; 2021 Mar; 103(3):203-207. PubMed ID: 33345975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy versus standard tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery for ovarian cancer risk reduction.
Subramaniam A; Einerson BD; Blanchard CT; Erickson BK; Szychowski J; Leath CA; Biggio JR; Huh WK
Gynecol Oncol; 2019 Jan; 152(1):127-132. PubMed ID: 30477808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Successful completion of total and partial salpingectomy at the time of cesarean delivery.
Lehn K; Gu L; Creinin MD; Chen MJ
Contraception; 2018 Sep; 98(3):232-236. PubMed ID: 29935148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation.
Lawrie TA; Kulier R; Nardin JM
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2016 Aug; 2016(8):CD003034. PubMed ID: 27494193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation.
Lawrie TA; Kulier R; Nardin JM
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2015 Sep; (9):CD003034. PubMed ID: 26343930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Opportunistic Salpingectomy for Permanent Contraception: A Cross Sectional Study in Portugal].
São Pedro V; Pires R; Santos F; Tovim Rodrigues C; Santos Silva I; Almeida MC; Águas F
Acta Med Port; 2021 Mar; 34(4):258-265. PubMed ID: 34214417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Total bilateral salpingectomy versus partial bilateral salpingectomy for permanent sterilization during cesarean delivery.
Shinar S; Blecher Y; Alpern S; Many A; Ashwal E; Amikam U; Cohen A
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 May; 295(5):1185-1189. PubMed ID: 28285425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Hysteroscopic proximal tubal occlusion versus laparoscopic salpingectomy as a treatment for hydrosalpinges prior to IVF or ICSI: an RCT.
Dreyer K; Lier MC; Emanuel MH; Twisk JW; Mol BW; Schats R; Hompes PG; Mijatovic V
Hum Reprod; 2016 Sep; 31(9):2005-16. PubMed ID: 27209341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Salpingectomy at the Time of Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Roeckner JT; Sawangkum P; Sanchez-Ramos L; Duncan JR
Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Mar; 135(3):550-557. PubMed ID: 32080033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Laparoscopic salpingectomy in tubal pregnancy: prospective randomized trial using endoloop versus electrocautery.
Lim YH; Ng SP; Ng PH; Tan AE; Jamil MA
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2007 Dec; 33(6):855-62. PubMed ID: 18001454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Contraception and sterilization selection at delivery among pregnant patients with malignancy.
Harris CA; Mandelbaum RS; Rau AR; Song BB; Klar M; Ouzounian JG; Paulson RJ; Roman LD; Matsuo K
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2024 Apr; 103(4):695-706. PubMed ID: 37578024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Mini-Laparoscopy for Removal (Partial) of Adnexae at the Time of Hysterectomy.
Setúbal AG; Alves JS; Lavado O; Faria J
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):201-202. PubMed ID: 27856389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The impact of opportunistic salpingectomy on ovarian cancer mortality and healthcare costs: a call for universal insurance coverage.
Naumann RW; Hughes BN; Brown J; Drury LK; Herzog TJ
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Oct; 225(4):397.e1-397.e6. PubMed ID: 33798477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Patients' perceptions toward and the driving factors of decision-making for opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy at the time of cesarean section.
Yassa M; Pulatoğlu Ç
Turk J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Jun; 17(2):115-122. PubMed ID: 32850186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Laparoscopic Essure® Device Removal by En Bloc Salpingectomy-Cornuectomy with Intraoperative X-Ray Checking: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Miquel L; Crochet P; Francini S; Compan C; Boubli L; Agostini A
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020; 27(3):697-703. PubMed ID: 31212073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Comparison of Industry-Leading Energy Devices for Use in Gynecologic Laparoscopy: Articulating ENSEAL versus LigaSure Energy Devices.
Shiber LJ; Ginn DN; Jan A; Gaskins JT; Biscette SM; Pasic R
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2018; 25(3):467-473.e1. PubMed ID: 29032252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Safety outcomes of female sterilization by salpingectomy and tubal occlusion.
Westberg J; Scott F; Creinin MD
Contraception; 2017 May; 95(5):505-508. PubMed ID: 28232128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Extending the safety evidence for opportunistic salpingectomy in prevention of ovarian cancer: a cohort study from British Columbia, Canada.
Hanley GE; Kwon JS; Finlayson SJ; Huntsman DG; Miller D; McAlpine JN
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Aug; 219(2):172.e1-172.e8. PubMed ID: 29852159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
