186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36449027)
1. Reoperation for prolapse recurrence after sacrospinous mesh hysteropexy: characteristics of women choosing retreatment.
Napoe GS; Luchristt D; Sridhar A; Ellington D; Ridgeway B; Mazloomdoost D; Sung V; Ninivaggio C; Harvie H; Santiago-Lastra Y; Gantz MG; Zyczynski HM
Int Urogynecol J; 2023 Jan; 34(1):255-261. PubMed ID: 36449027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Effect of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension on treatment failure in women with uterovaginal prolapse: 5-year results of a randomized clinical trial.
Nager CW; Visco AG; Richter HE; Rardin CR; Komesu Y; Harvie HS; Zyczynski HM; Paraiso MFR; Mazloomdoost D; Sridhar A; Thomas S;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Aug; 225(2):153.e1-153.e31. PubMed ID: 33716071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Guideline No. 413: Surgical Management of Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Women.
Geoffrion R; Larouche M
J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2021 Apr; 43(4):511-523.e1. PubMed ID: 33548503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Defining mechanisms of recurrence following apical prolapse repair based on imaging criteria.
Bowen ST; Moalli PA; Abramowitch SD; Lockhart ME; Weidner AC; Ferrando CA; Nager CW; Richter HE; Rardin CR; Komesu YM; Harvie HS; Mazloomdoost D; Sridhar A; Gantz MG;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Nov; 225(5):506.e1-506.e28. PubMed ID: 34087229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. The Impact of Sacrospinous Hysteropexy and Vaginal Hysterectomy With Suspension of the Uterosacral Ligaments on Sexual Function in Women With Uterine Prolapse: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Comparative Study.
Detollenaere RJ; Kreuwel IA; Dijkstra JR; Kluivers KB; van Eijndhoven HW
J Sex Med; 2016 Feb; 13(2):213-9. PubMed ID: 26805940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Uterine preservation vs hysterectomy in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis and clinical practice guidelines.
Meriwether KV; Antosh DD; Olivera CK; Kim-Fine S; Balk EM; Murphy M; Grimes CL; Sleemi A; Singh R; Dieter AA; Crisp CC; Rahn DD
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2018 Aug; 219(2):129-146.e2. PubMed ID: 29353031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Intermediate term outcomes after transvaginal uterine-preserving surgery in women with uterovaginal prolapse.
Hickman LC; Tran MC; Paraiso MFR; Walters MD; Ferrando CA
Int Urogynecol J; 2022 Jul; 33(7):2005-2012. PubMed ID: 34586437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Vaginal hysteropexy compared with vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: A 5-year cost-effectiveness Markov model.
Wallace SL; Syan R; Lee K; Sokol ER
BJOG; 2024 Feb; 131(3):362-371. PubMed ID: 37667669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.
Maher C; Feiner B; Baessler K; Schmid C
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Apr; (4):CD004014. PubMed ID: 23633316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Hysteropexy: an Option for the Repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Bradley S; Gutman RE; Richter LA
Curr Urol Rep; 2018 Feb; 19(2):15. PubMed ID: 29476274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prospective analysis of transvaginal mesh hysteropexy in the treatment of uterine prolapse.
Khandwala S; Cruff J
Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Aug; 32(8):2241-2247. PubMed ID: 33175230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Vaginal and laparoscopic mesh hysteropexy for uterovaginal prolapse: a parallel cohort study.
Gutman RE; Rardin CR; Sokol ER; Matthews C; Park AJ; Iglesia CB; Geoffrion R; Sokol AI; Karram M; Cundiff GW; Blomquist JL; Barber MD
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jan; 216(1):38.e1-38.e11. PubMed ID: 27596620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [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]
20. Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study).
Schulten SFM; Enklaar RA; Kluivers KB; van Leijsen SAL; Jansen-van der Weide MC; Adang EMM; van Bavel J; van Dongen H; Gerritse MBE; van Gestel I; Malmberg GGA; Mouw RJC; van Rumpt-van de Geest DA; Spaans WA; van der Steen A; Stekelenburg J; Tiersma ESM; Verkleij-Hagoort AC; Vollebregt A; Wingen CBM; Weemhoff M; van Eijndhoven HWF
BMC Womens Health; 2019 Apr; 19(1):49. PubMed ID: 30940171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
