148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9725000)
1. Does the narrow operating field in perineal radical prostatectomy lead to more positive surgical margins?
Shalev M; Tykochinsky G; Richter S; Kessler OJ; Nissenkorn I
Eur J Surg Oncol; 1998 Aug; 24(4):313-5. PubMed ID: 9725000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Location of positive surgical margins after retropubic, perineal, and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for organ-confined prostate cancer.
Salomon L; Anastasiadis AG; Levrel O; Katz R; Saint F; de la Taille A; Cicco A; Vordos D; Hoznek A; Chopin D; Abbou CC
Urology; 2003 Feb; 61(2):386-90. PubMed ID: 12597953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the perineal approach increases the risk of surgically induced positive margins and capsular incisions.
Boccon-Gibod L; Ravery V; Vordos D; Toublanc M; Delmas V; Boccon-Gibod L
J Urol; 1998 Oct; 160(4):1383-5. PubMed ID: 9751359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Localization of positive surgical margins after retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy].
Salomon L; Levrel O; de la Taille A; Hoznek A; Chopin D; Abbou CC
Prog Urol; 2002 Sep; 12(4):628-34. PubMed ID: 12463122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center.
Salomon L; Levrel O; de la Taille A; Anastasiadis AG; Saint F; Zaki S; Vordos D; Cicco A; Olsson LE; Hoznek A; Chopin D; Abbou CC
Eur Urol; 2002 Aug; 42(2):104-10; discussion 110-1. PubMed ID: 12160579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Perineal versus retropubic radical prostatectomy for T1, T2 prostate cancer.
Haab F; Boccon-Gibod L; Delmas V; Boccon-Gibod L; Toublanc M
Br J Urol; 1994 Nov; 74(5):626-9. PubMed ID: 7530127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A centralized comparison of radical perineal and retropubic prostatectomy specimens: is there a difference according to the surgical approach?
Korman HJ; Leu PB; Huang RR; Goldstein NS
J Urol; 2002 Sep; 168(3):991-4. PubMed ID: 12187206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Outcome and complications of radical prostatectomy in patients with PSA <10 ng/ml: comparison between the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach.
Salomon L; Levrel O; Anastasiadis AG; Saint F; de La Taille A; Cicco A; Vordos D; Hoznek A; Chopin D; Abbou CC
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis; 2002; 5(4):285-90. PubMed ID: 12627213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Early prostate-specific antigen failure following radical perineal versus retropubic prostatectomy: the importance of seminal vesicle excision.
Theodorescu D; Lippert MC; Broder SR; Boyd JC
Urology; 1998 Feb; 51(2):277-82. PubMed ID: 9495711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy.
Smith JA; Chan RC; Chang SS; Herrell SD; Clark PE; Baumgartner R; Cookson MS
J Urol; 2007 Dec; 178(6):2385-9; discussion 2389-90. PubMed ID: 17936849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A low incidence of positive surgical margins in prostate cancer at high risk of extracapsular extension after a modified anterograde radical prostatectomy.
Serni S; Masieri L; Lapini A; Nesi G; Carini M
BJU Int; 2004 Feb; 93(3):279-83. PubMed ID: 14764123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Risk factors of positive surgical margin and biochemical recurrence of patients treated with radical prostatectomy: a single-center 10-year report.
Li K; Li H; Yang Y; Ian LH; Pun WH; Ho SF
Chin Med J (Engl); 2011 Apr; 124(7):1001-5. PubMed ID: 21542957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Radical prostatectomy: the pros and cons of the perineal versus retropubic approach.
Frazier HA; Robertson JE; Paulson DF
J Urol; 1992 Mar; 147(3 Pt 2):888-90. PubMed ID: 1538490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Preoperative prediction of extracapsular tumor extension at radical retropubic prostatectomy in Taiwanese patients with T1c prostate cancer.
Ou YC; Chen JT; Yang CR; Cheng CL; Ho HC; Kao YL; Ko JL; Hsieh YS
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2002 May; 32(5):172-6. PubMed ID: 12110644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Molecular determination of surgical margins using fossa biopsies at radical prostatectomy.
Theodorescu D; Frierson HF; Sikes RA
J Urol; 1999 May; 161(5):1442-8. PubMed ID: 10210369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy.
Weldon VE; Tavel FR; Neuwirth H; Cohen R
J Urol; 1995 May; 153(5):1565-9. PubMed ID: 7536268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Stage T1-2 prostate cancer: a multivariate analysis of factors affecting biochemical and clinical failures after radical prostatectomy.
Kupelian PA; Katcher J; Levin HS; Klein EA
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1997 Mar; 37(5):1043-52. PubMed ID: 9169811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical significance of benign glands at surgical margins in robotic radical prostatectomy specimens.
Kohl SK; Balaji KC; Smith LM; Wilson NP; Johansson SL; Sterrett SP; Abrahams NA
Urology; 2007 Jun; 69(6):1112-6. PubMed ID: 17572197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy before radical prostatectomy: who is unlikely to benefit?
Rabbani F; Sullivan LD; Goldenberg SL; Stothers L
Br J Urol; 1997 Feb; 79(2):221-5. PubMed ID: 9052474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Residual prostatic tumour in the surgical bed following radical prostatectomy in organ-confined prostate cancer: possible prognostic significance.
Valotto C; Falconieri G; Pizzolitto S; Cerruto MA; Brondani G; De Gobbi A; Zattoni F
Arch Ital Urol Androl; 2011 Jun; 83(2):78-82. PubMed ID: 21826879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
