153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36598553)
21. Anatomical Outcomes Based on Suturing Technique During Vaginal Mesh Attachment in Robotic Sacrocolpopexy.
Bazzi AA; Osmundsen BC; Hagglund KH; Aslam MF
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2019; 25(2):105-108. PubMed ID: 30807409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy.
Kohli N; Walsh PM; Roat TW; Karram MM
Obstet Gynecol; 1998 Dec; 92(6):999-1004. PubMed ID: 9840566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.
Maher C; Feiner B; Baessler K; Glazener CM
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2010 Apr; (4):CD004014. PubMed ID: 20393938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Are Two Meshes Better than One in Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse? Comparison of Single Anterior versus Anterior and Posterior Vaginal Mesh Procedures.
d'Altilia N; Mancini V; Falagario U; Chirico M; Illiano E; Balzarro M; Annese P; Busetto GM; Bettocchi C; Cormio L; Sanguedolce F; Schiavina R; Brunocilla E; Costantini E; Carrieri G
Urol Int; 2022; 106(3):282-290. PubMed ID: 34839298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A pilot study comparing anatomic failure after sacrocolpopexy with absorbable or permanent sutures for vaginal mesh attachment.
Tan-Kim J; Menefee SA; Lippmann Q; Lukacz ES; Luber KM; Nager CW
Perm J; 2014; 18(4):40-4. PubMed ID: 25662525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparing the outcomes and effectiveness of robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.
Chang CL; Chen CH; Chang SJ
Int Urogynecol J; 2022 Feb; 33(2):297-308. PubMed ID: 33760992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The use of one-piece U-shaped mesh and barbed sutures in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.
García-Segui A; Lorenzo Soriano L; Costa-Martínez MA; Amorós Torres A; Gilabert A; Oltra MF
Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed); 2020; 44(1):49-55. PubMed ID: 31806248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.
Maher C; Baessler K; Glazener CM; Adams EJ; Hagen S
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2007 Jul; (3):CD004014. PubMed ID: 17636742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Impact of obesity on operative complications and outcome after sacrocolpopexy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Wen Q; Zhao Z; Wen J; Yang Y; Wang L; Wu J; Miao Y
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2021 Mar; 258():309-316. PubMed ID: 33498005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Technical features, perioperative and anatomical outcomes of a standardized suturing pattern for robotic sacrocolpopexy.
Giannini A; Russo E; Misasi G; Falcone M; Caretto M; Morganti R; Mannella P; Simoncini T
Int Urogynecol J; 2022 Nov; 33(11):3085-3092. PubMed ID: 35037972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A randomized controlled trial of permanent vs absorbable suture for uterosacral ligament suspension.
Kowalski JT; Genadry R; Ten Eyck P; Bradley CS
Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Apr; 32(4):785-790. PubMed ID: 32047968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. RCT of vaginal extraperitoneal uterosacral ligament suspension (VEULS) with anterior mesh versus sacrocolpopexy: 4-year outcome.
Ow LL; Lim YN; Lee J; Murray C; Thomas E; Leitch A; Rosamilia A; Dwyer PL
Int Urogynecol J; 2018 Nov; 29(11):1607-1614. PubMed ID: 29961110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Partially absorbable mesh or native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.
Steures P; Milani AL; van Rumpt-van de Geest DA; Kluivers KB; Withagen MIJ
Int Urogynecol J; 2019 Apr; 30(4):565-573. PubMed ID: 30159720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Sexual function after pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a systematic review comparing different approaches to pelvic floor repair.
Antosh DD; Dieter AA; Balk EM; Kanter G; Kim-Fine S; Meriwether KV; Mamik MM; Good MM; Singh R; Alas A; Foda MA; Rahn DD; Rogers RG
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2021 Nov; 225(5):475.e1-475.e19. PubMed ID: 34087227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy using barbed delayed absorbable sutures.
Borahay MA; Oge T; Walsh TM; Patel PR; Rodriguez AM; Kilic GS
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2014; 21(3):412-6. PubMed ID: 24263027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. A robotic approach to management of failed sacrocolpopexy and sacrocolpopexy complications: a case series.
Goodwin AI; Torres J; O'Shaughnessy DL; Finamore PS
Int Urogynecol J; 2022 Nov; 33(11):3231-3236. PubMed ID: 35267061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Graft and Mesh Use in Transvaginal Prolapse Repair: A Systematic Review.
Schimpf MO; Abed H; Sanses T; White AB; Lowenstein L; Ward RM; Sung VW; Balk EM; Murphy M;
Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Jul; 128(1):81-91. PubMed ID: 27275813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Securing Mesh with Delayed Absorbable Suture Does Not Increase Risk of Prolapse Recurrence After Robotic Sacral Colpopexy.
Powell CR; Tachibana I; Eckrich B; Rothenberg J; Hathaway J
J Endourol; 2021 Jun; 35(6):944-949. PubMed ID: 32037875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: a short version Cochrane review.
Maher C; Baessler K; Glazener CM; Adams EJ; Hagen S
Neurourol Urodyn; 2008; 27(1):3-12. PubMed ID: 18092333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
