145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37515926)
1. Is minimally invasive radical surgery safe for patients with cervical cancer ≤2 cm in size? (MISAFE): Gynecologic Oncology Research Investigators coLLborAtion study (GORILLA-1003).
Kong TW; Kim J; Son JH; Lee AJ; Yang EJ; Shim SH; Kim NK; Kim Y; Suh DH; Hwang DW; Park SJ; Kim HS; Lee YY; Yoo JG; Lee SJ; Chang SJ
Gynecol Oncol; 2023 Sep; 176():122-129. PubMed ID: 37515926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cervical conization before primary radical hysterectomy has a protective effect on disease recurrence in early cervical cancer: A two-center matched cohort study according to surgical approach.
Kim SI; Choi BR; Kim HS; Chung HH; Kim JW; Park NH; Song YS; Choi CH; Lee M
Gynecol Oncol; 2022 Mar; 164(3):535-542. PubMed ID: 34969535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Does a pre-operative conization improve disease-free survival in early-stage cervical cancer?
Benoit L; Koual M; Nguyen-Xuan HT; Balaya V; Nos C; Montero-Macías R; Bats AS
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2021 Jan; 303(1):231-239. PubMed ID: 32964259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Long-term oncological outcomes and recurrence patterns in early-stage cervical cancer treated with minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy: The Norwegian Radium Hospital experience.
Sert BM; Kristensen GB; Kleppe A; Dørum A
Gynecol Oncol; 2021 Aug; 162(2):284-291. PubMed ID: 34083029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Preoperative Conization and Risk of Recurrence in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer: A Multicenter Study.
Casarin J; Bogani G; Papadia A; Ditto A; Pinelli C; Garzon S; Donadello N; Laganà AS; Cromi A; Mueller M; Raspagliesi F; Ghezzi F
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Jan; 28(1):117-123. PubMed ID: 32320800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Predictors of recurrence following laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A multi-institutional study.
Casarin J; Buda A; Bogani G; Fanfani F; Papadia A; Ceccaroni M; Malzoni M; Pellegrino A; Ferrari F; Greggi S; Uccella S; Pinelli C; Cromi A; Ditto A; Di Martino G; Anchora LP; Falcone F; Bonfiglio F; Odicino F; Mueller M; Scambia G; Raspagliesi F; Landoni F; Ghezzi F
Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Oct; 159(1):164-170. PubMed ID: 32665147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy for early stage cervical cancer: A propensity score-matched cohort study.
Dai D; Huang H; Feng Y; Wan T; Liu Z; Tong C; Liu J
Cancer Med; 2020 Dec; 9(24):9236-9245. PubMed ID: 33236825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Recurrence Rates in Patients With Cervical Cancer Treated With Abdominal Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Review Study.
Uppal S; Gehrig PA; Peng K; Bixel KL; Matsuo K; Vetter MH; Davidson BA; Cisa MP; Lees BF; Brunette LL; Tucker K; Stuart Staley A; Gotlieb WH; Holloway RW; Essel KG; Holman LL; Goldfeld E; Olawaiye A; Rose SL
J Clin Oncol; 2020 Apr; 38(10):1030-1040. PubMed ID: 32031867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Laparotomic radical hysterectomy versus minimally invasive radical hysterectomy using vaginal colpotomy for the management of stage IB1 to IIA2 cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.
Yang EJ; Kim NR; Lee AJ; Shim SH; Lee SJ
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Feb; 101(8):e28911. PubMed ID: 35212297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Conization before radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: A Korean multicenter study (COBRA-R).
Kim SI; Nam SH; Hwangbo S; Kim Y; Cho HW; Suh DH; Song JY; Kim JW; Choi CH; Kim DY; Lee M
Gynecol Oncol; 2023 Jun; 173():88-97. PubMed ID: 37105062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Surveillance of radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer in the early experienced period of minimally invasive surgery in Japan.
Ohta T; Nagase S; Okui Y; Enomoto T; Yamagami W; Mikami M; Tokunaga H; Ino K; Ushijima K; Shozu M; Tashiro H; Mandai M; Miyamoto S; Morishige KI; Yoshida Y; Yoshino K; Saito T; Kobayashi E; Kobayashi H; Takekuma M; Terai Y; Fujii T; Kanao H; Aoki D; Katabuchi H; Yaegashi N
Int J Clin Oncol; 2021 Dec; 26(12):2318-2330. PubMed ID: 34435284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer.
Chiva L; Zanagnolo V; Querleu D; Martin-Calvo N; Arévalo-Serrano J; Căpîlna ME; Fagotti A; Kucukmetin A; Mom C; Chakalova G; Aliyev S; Malzoni M; Narducci F; Arencibia O; Raspagliesi F; Toptas T; Cibula D; Kaidarova D; Meydanli MM; Tavares M; Golub D; Perrone AM; Poka R; Tsolakidis D; Vujić G; Jedryka MA; Zusterzeel PLM; Beltman JJ; Goffin F; Haidopoulos D; Haller H; Jach R; Yezhova I; Berlev I; Bernardino M; Bharathan R; Lanner M; Maenpaa MM; Sukhin V; Feron JG; Fruscio R; Kukk K; Ponce J; Minguez JA; Vázquez-Vicente D; Castellanos T; Chacon E; Alcazar JL;
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2020 Sep; 30(9):1269-1277. PubMed ID: 32788262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Long-term oncological outcomes after laparoscopic versus abdominal radical hysterectomy in stage I a2- II a2 cervical cancer: a matched cohort study].
Wang W; Shang C; Huang J; Chen S; Shen H; Yao S
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2015 Dec; 50(12):894-901. PubMed ID: 26887872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Minimally invasive radical hysterectomy: an analysis of oncologic outcomes from Hospital Italiano (Argentina).
Odetto D; Puga MC; Saadi J; Noll F; Perrotta M
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2019 Jun; 29(5):863-868. PubMed ID: 31155517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Selection criteria and colpotomic approach for safe minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer.
Kong TW; Son JH; Paek J; Chang SJ; Ryu HS
J Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Jan; 31(1):e7. PubMed ID: 31788997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Lymph Node Ratio Is a Strong Prognostic Factor in Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Undergoing Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy.
Kim SI; Kim TH; Lee M; Kim HS; Chung HH; Lee TS; Jeon HW; Kim JW; Park NH; Song YS
Yonsei Med J; 2021 Mar; 62(3):231-239. PubMed ID: 33635013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of stages IB1 and IB2 cervical cancers treated with radical hysterectomy. Is size the real difference?
Rutledge TL; Kamelle SA; Tillmanns TD; Gould NS; Wright JD; Cohn DE; Herzog TJ; Rader JS; Gold MA; Johnson GA; Walker JL; Mannel RS; McMeekin DS
Gynecol Oncol; 2004 Oct; 95(1):70-6. PubMed ID: 15385112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcomes of Minimally Invasive versus Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early Stage Cervical Cancer Incorporating 2018 FIGO Staging.
Levine MD; Brown J; Crane EK; Tait DL; Naumann RW
J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Apr; 28(4):824-828. PubMed ID: 32730990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes.
Brandt B; Sioulas V; Basaran D; Kuhn T; LaVigne K; Gardner GJ; Sonoda Y; Chi DS; Long Roche KC; Mueller JJ; Jewell EL; Broach VA; Zivanovic O; Abu-Rustum NR; Leitao MM
Gynecol Oncol; 2020 Mar; 156(3):591-597. PubMed ID: 31918996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Association of preoperative conization with recurrences after laparoscopic radical hysterectomy for FIGO 2018 stage IB1 cervical cancer.
Ding Y; Zhang X; Qiu J; Li C; Hua K
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2023 Jun; 307(6):1901-1909. PubMed ID: 36329212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
