136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36943527)
1. Insurance Disparities in Access to Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.
Childers CP; Uppal A; Tillman M; Chang GJ; Tran Cao HS
Ann Surg Oncol; 2023 Jun; 30(6):3560-3568. PubMed ID: 36943527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. National trends and disparities of minimally invasive surgery for localized renal cancer, 2010 to 2015.
Xia L; Talwar R; Taylor BL; Shin MH; Berger IB; Sperling CD; Chelluri RR; Zambrano IA; Raman JD; Guzzo TJ
Urol Oncol; 2019 Mar; 37(3):182.e17-182.e27. PubMed ID: 30630732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Do specific operative approaches and insurance status impact timely access to colorectal cancer care?
Lo BD; Zhang GQ; Stem M; Sahyoun R; Efron JE; Safar B; Atallah C
Surg Endosc; 2021 Jul; 35(7):3774-3786. PubMed ID: 32813058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Trends in the Use of Laparoscopy and Robotics for Colorectal Cancer in Florida.
Osagiede O; Spaulding AC; Cochuyt JJ; Naessens J; Merchea A; Colibaseanu DT
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2019 Jul; 29(7):926-933. PubMed ID: 31094645
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. National disparities in minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.
Gabriel E; Thirunavukarasu P; Al-Sukhni E; Attwood K; Nurkin SJ
Surg Endosc; 2016 Mar; 30(3):1060-7. PubMed ID: 26092020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Social determinants of access to minimally invasive hysterectomy: reevaluating the relationship between race and route of hysterectomy for benign disease.
Price JT; Zimmerman LD; Koelper NC; Sammel MD; Lee S; Butts SF
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 217(5):572.e1-572.e10. PubMed ID: 28784416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating the Regional Uptake of Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: a Report from the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program.
Unruh KR; Bastawrous AL; Bernier GV; Flum DR; Kumar AS; Moonka R; Thirlby RC; Simianu VV
J Gastrointest Surg; 2021 Sep; 25(9):2387-2397. PubMed ID: 33206328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Is robotic utilization associated with increased minimally invasive colorectal surgery rates? Surgeon-level evidence.
Justiniano CF; Becerra AZ; Loria A; Xu Z; Aquina CT; Temple LK; Fleming FJ
Surg Endosc; 2022 Aug; 36(8):5618-5626. PubMed ID: 35024928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Insurance Status, Not Race, is Associated With Use of Minimally Invasive Surgical Approach for Rectal Cancer.
Turner M; Adam MA; Sun Z; Kim J; Ezekian B; Yerokun B; Mantyh C; Migaly J
Ann Surg; 2017 Apr; 265(4):774-781. PubMed ID: 27163956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Regional variations and deprivation are linked to poorer access to laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery: a national study in England.
Morton AJ; Simpson A; Humes DJ
Tech Coloproctol; 2023 Dec; 28(1):9. PubMed ID: 38078978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Effect of Formal Robotic Residency Training on the Adoption of Minimally Invasive Surgery by Young Colorectal Surgeons.
Disbrow DE; Pannell SM; Shanker BA; Albright J; Wu J; Bastawrous A; Soliman M; Ferraro J; Cleary RK
J Surg Educ; 2018; 75(3):767-778. PubMed ID: 29054345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults.
Simon HL; Reif de Paula T; Spigel ZA; Keller DS
J Am Geriatr Soc; 2022 Jan; 70(1):126-135. PubMed ID: 34559891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Adoption of Robotic Technology for Treating Colorectal Cancer.
Schootman M; Hendren S; Ratnapradipa K; Stringer L; Davidson NO
Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 Nov; 59(11):1011-1018. PubMed ID: 27749475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery.
Tam MS; Kaoutzanis C; Mullard AJ; Regenbogen SE; Franz MG; Hendren S; Krapohl G; Vandewarker JF; Lampman RM; Cleary RK
Surg Endosc; 2016 Feb; 30(2):455-463. PubMed ID: 25894448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Ureteral injuries in colorectal surgery and the impact of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches.
Mayo JS; Brazer ML; Bogenberger KJ; Tavares KB; Conrad RJ; Lustik MB; Gillern SM; Park CW; Richards CR
Surg Endosc; 2021 Jun; 35(6):2805-2816. PubMed ID: 32591939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Understanding the Value of Both Laparoscopic and Robotic Approaches Compared to the Open Approach in Colorectal Surgery.
Hollis RH; Cannon JA; Singletary BA; Korb ML; Hawn MT; Heslin MJ
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A; 2016 Nov; 26(11):850-856. PubMed ID: 27398733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Hayden DM; Korous KM; Brooks E; Tuuhetaufa F; King-Mullins EM; Martin AM; Grimes C; Rogers CR
Surg Endosc; 2023 May; 37(5):3306-3320. PubMed ID: 36520224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.
Vasudevan V; Reusche R; Wallace H; Kaza S
Surg Endosc; 2016 Dec; 30(12):5490-5493. PubMed ID: 27126626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Trends in Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches to Colorectal Operations.
Hajirawala LN; Leonardi C; Orangio GR; Davis KG; Barton JS
Am Surg; 2023 May; 89(5):2129-2131. PubMed ID: 34318696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Hospital Type Drives Utilization and Outcomes.
Villano AM; Zeymo A; Houlihan BK; Bayasi M; Al-Refaie WB; Chan KS
J Surg Res; 2020 Mar; 247():180-189. PubMed ID: 31753556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
