327 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9400436)
1. Endopyelotomy for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction: risk factors determine the success rate.
Danuser H; Ackermann DK; Böhlen D; Studer UE
J Urol; 1998 Jan; 159(1):56-61. PubMed ID: 9400436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Sundaram CP; Grubb RL; Rehman J; Yan Y; Chen C; Landman J; McDougall EM; Clayman RV
J Urol; 2003 Jun; 169(6):2037-40. PubMed ID: 12771713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Is antegrade endopyelotomy really less invasive than open pyeloplasty?
Dobry E; Usai P; Studer UE; Danuser H
Urol Int; 2007; 79(2):152-6. PubMed ID: 17851286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of stent size on the success of antegrade endopyelotomy for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction: results of 2 consecutive series.
Danuser H; Hochreiter WW; Ackermann DK; Studer UE
J Urol; 2001 Sep; 166(3):902-9. PubMed ID: 11490243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of percutaneous endopyelotomy with open pyeloplasty for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Schenkman EM; Tarry WF
J Urol; 1998 Mar; 159(3):1013-5. PubMed ID: 9474220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Failed pyeloplasty in children: comparative analysis of retrograde endopyelotomy versus redo pyeloplasty.
Braga LH; Lorenzo AJ; Skeldon S; Dave S; Bagli DJ; Khoury AE; Pippi Salle JL; Farhat WA
J Urol; 2007 Dec; 178(6):2571-5; discussion 2575. PubMed ID: 17945304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Equivocal ureteropelvic junction obstruction on diuretic renogram--should minimally invasive pyeloplasty be offered to symptomatic patients?
Ozayar A; Friedlander JI; Shakir NA; Gahan JC; Cadeddu JA; Morgan MS
J Urol; 2015 Apr; 193(4):1278-82. PubMed ID: 25444983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Endopyeloplasty versus endopyelotomy versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primary ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Desai MM; Desai MR; Gill IS
Urology; 2004 Jul; 64(1):16-21; discussion 21. PubMed ID: 15245924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Variation in the Use of Open Pyeloplasty, Minimally Invasive Pyeloplasty, and Endopyelotomy for the Treatment of Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Adults.
Jacobs BL; Lai JC; Seelam R; Hanley JM; Wolf JS; Hollenbeck BK; Hollingsworth JM; Dick AW; Setodji CM; Saigal CS
J Endourol; 2017 Feb; 31(2):210-215. PubMed ID: 27936909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Endopyelotomy for pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a review of our 25-year experience.
Kim EH; Tanagho YS; Traxel EJ; Austin PF; Figenshau RS; Coplen DE
J Urol; 2012 Oct; 188(4 Suppl):1628-33. PubMed ID: 22906656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Adult endopyelotomy: impact of etiology and antegrade versus retrograde approach on outcome.
Shalhav AL; Giusti G; Elbahnasy AM; Hoenig DM; McDougall EM; Smith DS; Maxwell KL; Clayman RV
J Urol; 1998 Sep; 160(3 Pt 1):685-9. PubMed ID: 9720521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Retrograde ureteroscopic endopyelotomy using the holmium:YAG laser.
Giddens JL; Grasso M
J Urol; 2000 Nov; 164(5):1509-12. PubMed ID: 11025693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Pediatric endopyelotomy: the Washington University experience.
Figenshau RS; Clayman RV; Colberg JW; Coplen DE; Soble JJ; Manley CB
J Urol; 1996 Dec; 156(6):2025-30. PubMed ID: 8911382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Long-term success of antegrade endopyelotomy compared with pyeloplasty at a single institution.
Dimarco DS; Gettman MT; McGee SM; Chow GK; Leroy AJ; Slezak J; Patterson DE; Segura JW
J Endourol; 2006 Oct; 20(10):707-12. PubMed ID: 17094743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Minimally invasive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: long-term experience with an algorithm for laser endopyelotomy and laparoscopic retroperitoneal pyeloplasty.
Rassweiler JJ; Subotic S; Feist-Schwenk M; Sugiono M; Schulze M; Teber D; Frede T
J Urol; 2007 Mar; 177(3):1000-5. PubMed ID: 17296396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Endopyelotomy after failed pyeloplasty: the long-term results.
Jabbour ME; Goldfischer ER; Klima WJ; Stravodimos KG; Smith AD
J Urol; 1998 Sep; 160(3 Pt 1):690-2; discussion 692-3. PubMed ID: 9720522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Endopyelotomy for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.
Kavoussi LR; Meretyk S; Dierks SM; Bigg SW; Gup DI; Manley CB; Shapiro E; Clayman RV
J Urol; 1991 Feb; 145(2):345-9. PubMed ID: 1988728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Long-term outcome of secondary endopyelotomy after failed primary intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Park J; Kim WS; Hong B; Park T; Park HK
Int J Urol; 2008 Jun; 15(6):490-4. PubMed ID: 18422578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Percutaneous endopyelotomy in infants and young children after failed open pyeloplasty.
Faerber GJ; Ritchey ML; Bloom DA
J Urol; 1995 Oct; 154(4):1495-7. PubMed ID: 7658575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Urodynamic evaluation of results of endopyelotomy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Gotoh M; Yoshikawa Y; Nagai T; Sakakibara T; Kondo A; Miyake K
J Urol; 1993 Nov; 150(5 Pt 1):1444-7. PubMed ID: 8411420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
