153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36598553)
1. Comparative study of absorbable suture and permanent suture in sacrocolpopexy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Chen S; Liu Y; Peng L; Chen Y; Shen H; Luo D
Int Urogynecol J; 2023 May; 34(5):993-1000. PubMed ID: 36598553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Is absorbable suture superior to permanent suture for uterosacral ligament suspension?
Peng L; Liu YH; He SX; Di XP; Shen H; Luo DY
Neurourol Urodyn; 2020 Sep; 39(7):1958-1965. PubMed ID: 32658368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Permanent Compared With Absorbable Suture in Apical Prolapse Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Pollack BL; Popiel P; Toaff MC; Drugge E; Bielawski A; Sacks A; Bibi M; Friedman-Ciment R; LeBron K; Alishahian L; Phillips D; Rubino SR; Pollack S; Khan RS; Khan ES; Pape DM; Grimes CL
Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Feb; 141(2):268-283. PubMed ID: 36649334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Permanent Compared With Absorbable Suture for Vaginal Mesh Fixation During Total Hysterectomy and Sacrocolpopexy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Matthews CA; Geller EJ; Henley BR; Kenton K; Myers EM; Dieter AA; Parnell B; Lewicky-Gaupp C; Mueller MG; Wu JM
Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Aug; 136(2):355-364. PubMed ID: 32649494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: guidelines for clinical practice].
Wagner L; Meurette G; Vidart A; Warembourg S; Terassa JB; Berrogain N; Ragni E; Le Normand L
Prog Urol; 2016 Jul; 26 Suppl 1():S27-37. PubMed ID: 27595624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures for vaginal mesh attachment during sacrocolpopexy: a randomized controlled trial.
Reisenauer C; Andress J; Schoenfisch B; Huebner M; Brucker SY; Lippkowski A; Beilecke K; Marschke J; Tunn R
Int Urogynecol J; 2022 Feb; 33(2):411-419. PubMed ID: 34100975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Long-Term Mesh Exposure 5 Years Following Minimally Invasive Total Hysterectomy and Sacrocolpopexy.
Bretschneider CE; Myers ER; Geller EJ; Kenton KS; Henley BR; Matthews CA
Int Urogynecol J; 2024 Apr; 35(4):901-907. PubMed ID: 38530401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Anchor vs suture for the attachment of vaginal mesh in a robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: a randomized clinical trial.
Berger AA; Tan-Kim J; Menefee SA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Aug; 223(2):258.e1-258.e8. PubMed ID: 32413431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension: A Retrospective Cohort of Absorbable and Permanent Suture Groups.
Bradley MS; Bickhaus JA; Amundsen CL; Newcomb LK; Truong T; Weidner AC; Siddiqui NY
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2018; 24(3):207-212. PubMed ID: 28657988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mesh-related complications of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.
Baines G; Price N; Jefferis H; Cartwright R; Jackson SR
Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Sep; 30(9):1475-1481. PubMed ID: 31041499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Long-term pelvic organ prolapse recurrence and mesh exposure following sacrocolpopexy.
Thomas TN; Davidson ERW; Lampert EJ; Paraiso MFR; Ferrando CA
Int Urogynecol J; 2020 Sep; 31(9):1763-1770. PubMed ID: 32253489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Siddiqui NY; Grimes CL; Casiano ER; Abed HT; Jeppson PC; Olivera CK; Sanses TV; Steinberg AC; South MM; Balk EM; Sung VW;
Obstet Gynecol; 2015 Jan; 125(1):44-55. PubMed ID: 25560102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Traditional native tissue versus mesh-augmented pelvic organ prolapse repairs: providing an accurate interpretation of current literature.
Stanford EJ; Cassidenti A; Moen MD
Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Jan; 23(1):19-28. PubMed ID: 22068321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Long-term outcomes following abdominal sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse.
Nygaard I; Brubaker L; Zyczynski HM; Cundiff G; Richter H; Gantz M; Fine P; Menefee S; Ridgeway B; Visco A; Warren LK; Zhang M; Meikle S
JAMA; 2013 May; 309(19):2016-24. PubMed ID: 23677313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Sacrocolpopexy compared with transvaginal mesh surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang CY; Sun ZJ; Yang J; Xu T; Zhu L; Lang JH
BJOG; 2021 Jan; 128(1):14-23. PubMed ID: 32426903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of absorbable and permanent sutures for laparoscopic sacrocervicopexy: A randomized controlled trial.
Tagliaferri V; Ruggieri S; Taccaliti C; Gentile C; Didonna T; D'asta M; Legge F; Guida P; Scambia G; Guido M
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2021 Feb; 100(2):347-352. PubMed ID: 32970837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Permanent or absorbable suture material for sacrospinous ligament fixation: Does it matter?
Padoa A; Ziv Y; Tsviban A; Tomashev R; Smorgick N; Fligelman T
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2023 Apr; 283():112-117. PubMed ID: 36827752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Surgery for women with posterior compartment prolapse.
Mowat A; Maher D; Baessler K; Christmann-Schmid C; Haya N; Maher C
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Mar; 3(3):CD012975. PubMed ID: 29502352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
