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 *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36470561)

  • 1. Robotic Esophagectomy Trends and Early Surgical Outcomes: The US Experience.
    Khaitan PG; Vekstein AM; Thibault D; Kosinski A; Hartwig MG; Block M; Gaissert H; Wolf AS
    Ann Thorac Surg; 2023 Mar; 115(3):710-717. PubMed ID: 36470561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Postoperative Outcomes in a Nationwide Cohort.
    Turner KM; Delman AM; Johnson K; Patel SH; Wilson GC; Shah SA; Van Haren RM
    J Surg Res; 2023 Mar; 283():152-160. PubMed ID: 36410231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) vs. hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: propensity score matched short-term outcome analysis of a European high-volume center.
    Babic B; Müller DT; Jung JO; Schiffmann LM; Grisar P; Schmidt T; Chon SH; Schröder W; Bruns CJ; Fuchs HF
    Surg Endosc; 2022 Oct; 36(10):7747-7755. PubMed ID: 35505259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched analysis.
    Tagkalos E; Goense L; Hoppe-Lotichius M; Ruurda JP; Babic B; Hadzijusufovic E; Kneist W; van der Sluis PC; Lang H; van Hillegersberg R; Grimminger PP
    Dis Esophagus; 2020 Apr; 33(4):. PubMed ID: 31206577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Robotic versus open Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: A more accurate lymph node dissection without burdening the leak rate.
    Weindelmayer J; De Pasqual CA; Turolo C; Gervasi MC; Sacco M; Bencivenga M; Giacopuzzi S
    J Surg Oncol; 2023 Jun; 127(7):1109-1115. PubMed ID: 36971002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus the conventional minimally invasive one: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
    Jin D; Yao L; Yu J; Liu R; Guo T; Yang K; Gou Y
    Int J Med Robot; 2019 Jun; 15(3):e1988. PubMed ID: 30737881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Does the Approach Matter? Comparing Survival in Robotic, Minimally Invasive, and Open Esophagectomies.
    Espinoza-Mercado F; Imai TA; Borgella JD; Sarkissian A; Serna-Gallegos D; Alban RF; Soukiasian HJ
    Ann Thorac Surg; 2019 Feb; 107(2):378-385. PubMed ID: 30312615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study.
    Sakurai T; Hoshino A; Miyoshi K; Yamada E; Enomoto M; Mazaki J; Kuwabara H; Iwasaki K; Ota Y; Tachibana S; Hayashi Y; Ishizaki T; Nagakawa Y
    World J Surg Oncol; 2024 Mar; 22(1):80. PubMed ID: 38504312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Survival After Esophagectomy: A Propensity-Matched Study of Different Surgical Approaches.
    Weksler B; Sullivan JL
    Ann Thorac Surg; 2017 Oct; 104(4):1138-1146. PubMed ID: 28760463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy - our first experience.
    Haruštiak T; Jaroščiaková S; Šnajdauf M; Pazdro A; Lischke R
    Rozhl Chir; 2023; 102(11):422-429. PubMed ID: 38290818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Robot-assisted and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy are associated with better postoperative results compared to hybrid and open transthoracic esophagectomy.
    van der Sluis PC; Babic B; Uzun E; Tagkalos E; Berlth F; Hadzijusufovic E; Lang H; Gockel I; van Hillegersberg R; Grimminger PP
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2022 Apr; 48(4):776-782. PubMed ID: 34838394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Video-Assisted, and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    Mederos MA; de Virgilio MJ; Shenoy R; Ye L; Toste PA; Mak SS; Booth MS; Begashaw MM; Wilson M; Gunnar W; Shekelle PG; Maggard-Gibbons M; Girgis MD
    JAMA Netw Open; 2021 Nov; 4(11):e2129228. PubMed ID: 34724556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-term survival outcomes associated with robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer.
    Byiringiro I; Aurit SJ; Nandipati KC
    Surg Endosc; 2023 May; 37(5):4018-4027. PubMed ID: 36097100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Robotic Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.
    Zhang Y; Dong D; Cao Y; Huang M; Li J; Zhang J; Lin J; Sarkaria IS; Toni L; David R; He J; Li H
    Ann Surg; 2023 Jul; 278(1):39-50. PubMed ID: 36538615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Robot-assisted Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Early Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial: the RAMIE Trial.
    Yang Y; Li B; Yi J; Hua R; Chen H; Tan L; Li H; He Y; Guo X; Sun Y; Yu B; Li Z
    Ann Surg; 2022 Apr; 275(4):646-653. PubMed ID: 34171870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Lower Incidence of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications Following Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Propensity Score-Matched Comparison to Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.
    Tsunoda S; Obama K; Hisamori S; Nishigori T; Okamura R; Maekawa H; Sakai Y
    Ann Surg Oncol; 2021 Feb; 28(2):639-647. PubMed ID: 32892268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of training pathway to reach expert performance levels based on proficiency-based progression in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE).
    Müller DT; Brunner S; Straatman J; Babic B; Eckhoff JA; Reisewitz A; Storms C; Schiffmann LM; Schmidt T; Schröder W; Bruns CJ; Fuchs HF
    Surg Endosc; 2023 Sep; 37(9):7305-7316. PubMed ID: 37580580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with extended lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer compared with video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: A single-center retrospective study.
    Morimoto Y; Kawakubo H; Ishikawa A; Matsuda S; Hijikata N; Ando M; Mayanagi S; Irino T; Nakamura R; Wada N; Tsuji T; Kitagawa Y
    Asian J Endosc Surg; 2022 Apr; 15(2):270-278. PubMed ID: 34637190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Outcomes of 350 Robotic-assisted Esophagectomies at a High-volume Cancer Center: A Contemporary Propensity-score Matched Analysis.
    Pointer DT; Saeed S; Naffouje SA; Mehta R; Hoffe SE; Dineen SP; Fleming JB; Fontaine JP; Pimiento JM
    Ann Surg; 2022 Jul; 276(1):111-118. PubMed ID: 33201093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparisons between minimally invasive and open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis: a retrospective study.
    Li Z; Liu C; Liu Y; Yao S; Xu B; Dong G
    J Cardiothorac Surg; 2020 Jun; 15(1):128. PubMed ID: 32513211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.