These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

329 related items for PubMed ID: 10085394

  • 21. When are defunctioning stomas in rectal cancer surgery really reversed? Results from a population-based single center experience.
    Floodeen H, Lindgren R, Matthiessen P.
    Scand J Surg; 2013; 102(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 24056133
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Persistent Asymptomatic Anastomotic Leakage After Laparoscopic Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Can Diverting Stoma Be Reversed Safely at 6 Months?
    Hain E, Maggiori L, Manceau G, Zappa M, Prost à la Denise J, Panis Y.
    Dis Colon Rectum; 2016 May; 59(5):369-76. PubMed ID: 27050598
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. High complication rate after low anterior resection for mid and high rectal cancer; results of a population-based study.
    Bakker IS, Snijders HS, Wouters MW, Havenga K, Tollenaar RA, Wiggers T, Dekker JW.
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2014 Jun; 40(6):692-8. PubMed ID: 24655803
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Septic complications after low anterior rectal resection--is diverting stoma still justified?
    Leester B, Asztalos I, Polnyib C.
    Acta Chir Iugosl; 2002 Jun; 49(2):67-71. PubMed ID: 12587473
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Chronic anastomotic sinus after low anterior resection: when can the defunctioning stoma be reversed?
    Fong SS, Chen K, Sim R.
    Colorectal Dis; 2011 Jun; 13(6):644-9. PubMed ID: 20184635
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Ileostomy versus colostomy: impact on functional outcomes after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
    Martellucci J, Balestri R, Brusciano L, Iacopini V, Puccini M, Docimo L, Cianchi F, Buccianti P, Prosperi P.
    Colorectal Dis; 2023 Aug; 25(8):1686-1693. PubMed ID: 37461265
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Ghost ileostomy after anterior resection for rectal cancer: a preliminary experience.
    Gullà N, Trastulli S, Boselli C, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Verdecchia GM, Morelli U, Gentile D, Eugeni E, Caracappa D, Listorti C, Sciannameo F, Noya G.
    Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2011 Oct; 396(7):997-1007. PubMed ID: 21479620
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. [Meta-analysis for high-risk factor of anastomotic leakage after anal-preserving surgery for rectal cancer].
    Ye Y, Jiang H.
    Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2011 Oct; 21(4):448-455. PubMed ID: 29682718
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. The role of faecal diversion in low rectal cancer: a review of 1791 patients having rectal resection with anastomosis for cancer, with and without a proximal stoma.
    Nurkin S, Kakarla VR, Ruiz DE, Cance WG, Tiszenkel HI.
    Colorectal Dis; 2013 Jun; 15(6):e309-16. PubMed ID: 23586660
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Impact of an institutional change from routine to highly selective diversion of a low anastomosis after TME for rectal cancer.
    Blok RD, Stam R, Westerduin E, Borstlap WAA, Hompes R, Bemelman WA, Tanis PJ.
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2018 Aug; 44(8):1220-1225. PubMed ID: 29685761
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 17.