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

151 related items for PubMed ID: 32658368

  • 1. Is absorbable suture superior to permanent suture for uterosacral ligament suspension?
    Peng L, Liu YH, He SX, Di XP, Shen H, Luo DY.
    Neurourol Urodyn; 2020 Sep; 39(7):1958-1965. PubMed ID: 32658368
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Permanent Compared With Absorbable Suture in Apical Prolapse Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    Pollack BL, Popiel P, Toaff MC, Drugge E, Bielawski A, Sacks A, Bibi M, Friedman-Ciment R, LeBron K, Alishahian L, Phillips D, Rubino SR, Pollack S, Khan RS, Khan ES, Pape DM, Grimes CL.
    Obstet Gynecol; 2023 Feb 01; 141(2):268-283. PubMed ID: 36649334
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension: A Retrospective Cohort of Absorbable and Permanent Suture Groups.
    Bradley MS, Bickhaus JA, Amundsen CL, Newcomb LK, Truong T, Weidner AC, Siddiqui NY.
    Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg; 2018 Feb 01; 24(3):207-212. PubMed ID: 28657988
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Comparative study of absorbable suture and permanent suture in sacrocolpopexy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
    Chen S, Liu Y, Peng L, Chen Y, Shen H, Luo D.
    Int Urogynecol J; 2023 May 01; 34(5):993-1000. PubMed ID: 36598553
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Absorbable versus Permanent Suture for Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Treatment of Apical Prolapse.
    Chill HH, Cohen-Milun G, Cohen A, Moss NP, Winer JD, Shveiky D.
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2022 Jun 01; 29(6):784-790. PubMed ID: 35283321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. A randomized controlled trial of permanent vs absorbable suture for uterosacral ligament suspension.
    Kowalski JT, Genadry R, Ten Eyck P, Bradley CS.
    Int Urogynecol J; 2021 Apr 01; 32(4):785-790. PubMed ID: 32047968
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women.
    Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Apr 30; (4):CD004014. PubMed ID: 23633316
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Laparoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy vs Total Vaginal Hysterectomy with Uterosacral Ligament Suspension for Anterior and Apical Prolapse: Surgical Outcome and Patient Satisfaction.
    Haj-Yahya R, Chill HH, Levin G, Reuveni-Salzman A, Shveiky D.
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2020 Jan 30; 27(1):88-93. PubMed ID: 30802607
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Suture Complication Rates and Surgical Outcomes According to the Nonabsorbable Suture Materials Used in Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension: Polyester versus Polypropylene.
    Lee J, Oh S, Jeon MJ.
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Aug 30; 28(8):1503-1507. PubMed ID: 33310165
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Permanent suture used in uterosacral ligament suspension offers better anatomical support than delayed absorbable suture.
    Chung CP, Miskimins R, Kuehl TJ, Yandell PM, Shull BL.
    Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Feb 30; 23(2):223-7. PubMed ID: 21892683
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Uterosacral ligament vaginal vault suspension using delayed absorbable monofilament suture.
    Wong MJ, Rezvan A, Bhatia NN, Yazdany T.
    Int Urogynecol J; 2011 Nov 30; 22(11):1389-94. PubMed ID: 21681596
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Uterosacral Ligament Hysteropexy: An Innovative Approach for Treatment of Uterine Prolapse.
    Lowenstein L, Ben-David C, Mick I, Levi G, Matanes E, Mor O.
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2021 Nov 30; 28(11):1818-1819. PubMed ID: 34171475
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Sacrospinous hysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension in women with uterine prolapse stage 2 or higher: observational follow-up of a multicentre randomised trial.
    Schulten SFM, Detollenaere RJ, Stekelenburg J, IntHout J, Kluivers KB, van Eijndhoven HWF.
    BMJ; 2019 Sep 10; 366():l5149. PubMed ID: 31506252
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.