FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2025693764> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2025693764 endingPage "453" @default.
• W2025693764 startingPage "451" @default.
• W2025693764 abstract "Journal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchVol. 3, No. 5 EditorialApproaches to radical prostatectomyMichael Froehner & Manfred P WirthMichael FroehnerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, GermanySearch for more papers by this author & Manfred P WirthDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:28 Oct 2014https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.14.45AboutSectionsView ArticleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail View articleKeywords: approachesblood losscontinencecostsopen surgerypotencyradical prostatectomyrobot-assisted surgerysurgical marginsReferences1 Huang KH, Carter SC, Shih YC et al.. Robotic and standard open radical prostatectomy: oncological and quality-of-life outcomes. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 2(3), 293–299 (2013).Link, Google Scholar2 Hatiboglu G, Teber D, Hohenfellner M. Robot-assisted prostatectomy: the new standard of care. Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 397(3), 343–352 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar3 Kang DC, Hardee MJ, Fesperman SF et al.. Low quality of evidence for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: results of a systematic review of the published literature. Eur. Urol. 57(6), 930–937 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar4 Barbash GI, Glied SA. New technology and health care costs – the case of robot-assisted surgery. N. Engl. J. Med. 363(8), 701–704 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar5 Healy KA, Gomella LG. Retropubic, laparoscopic or robotic radical prostatectomy: is there any real difference? Semin. Oncol. 40(3), 286–296 (2013).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar6 Minniti D, Chiadò Piat S, Di Novi C. Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based comparison. Technol. Health Care 19(5), 331–339 (2011).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar7 Froehner M, Koch R, Leike S et al.. Urinary tract-related quality of life after radical prostatectomy: open retropubic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Urol. Int. 90(1), 36–40 (2013).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar8 Froehner M, Novotny V, Koch R et al.. Perioperative complications after radical prostatectomy: open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic approach. Urol. Int. 90(3), 312–315 (2013).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar9 Kim SC, Song C, Kim W et al.. Factors determining functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy: robot-assisted versus retropubic. Eur. Urol. 60(3), 413–419 (2011).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar10 Parsons JK, Messer K, Palazzi K et al.. Diffusion of surgical innovations, patient safety and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.31 (2014) (Epub ahead of print).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar11 Wirth MP, Froehner M. Radical prostatectomy only centers – the future in genitourinary surgery? Eur. Urol. 57(6), 953–954 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar12 Vickers A, Savage C, Bianco F et al.. Cancer control and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy as markers of surgical quality: analysis of heterogeneity between surgeons at a single cancer center. Eur. Urol. 59(3), 317–322 (2011). Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar13 Gandaglia G, Sammon JD, Chang SL et al.. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy in the postdissemination era. J. Clin. Oncol. 32(14), 1419–1426 (2014).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar14 Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC et al.. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 62(3), 405–417 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar15 Sooriakumaran P, Srivastava A, Shariat SF et al.. A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22393 open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. Eur. Urol. doi:10.1016j.eururo.11.018 (2013) (Epub ahead of print). Google Scholar16 Hu JC, Gandaglia G, Karakiewicz PI et al.. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy cancer control. Eur. Urol. doi:10.1016j.eururo.02.015 (2014) (Epub ahead of print).Crossref, Google Scholar17 Parsons JK, Bennett JL. Outcomes of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Urology 72(2), 412–416 (2008).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar18 Ferronha F, Barros F, Santos VV et al.. Is there any evidence of superiority between retropubic, laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? Int. Braz. J. Urol. 37(2), 146–158 (2011).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar19 Kim SP, Shah ND, Karnes RJ et al.. Hospitalization costs for radical prostatectomy attributable to robotic surgery. Eur. Urol. 64(1), 11–16 (2013).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar20 Galfano A, Di Trapani D, Sozzi F et al.. Beyond the learning curve of the Retzius-sparing approach for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional results of the first 200 patients with ≥1 year of follow-up. Eur. Urol. 64(6), 974–980 (2013).Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By¿Es complejo reparar la hernia inguinal del prostatectomizado por vía retropúbica mediante el abordaje preperitoneal posterior abierto tipo Nyhus «corto» (técnica de Dávila)?Revista Hispanoamericana de Hernia, Vol. 3, No. 1 Vol. 3, No. 5 Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics Downloaded 29 times History Published online 28 October 2014 Published in print September 2014 Information© Future Medicine LtdKeywordsapproachesblood losscontinencecostsopen surgerypotencyradical prostatectomyrobot-assisted surgerysurgical marginsFinancial & competing interests disclosureThe authors perform radical prostatectomy both via the open retropubic approach and with the da Vinci® robot (Intuitive Surgical Systems, Inc.) and attended the console training offered by Intuitive Surgical Systems, Inc. (CA, USA). The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.PDF download" @default.
• W2025693764 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2025693764 creator A5002773830 @default.
• W2025693764 creator A5065289402 @default.
• W2025693764 date "2014-09-01" @default.
• W2025693764 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2025693764 title "Approaches to radical prostatectomy" @default.
• W2025693764 cites W1698568602 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W1965210305 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2001012423 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2004820131 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2053890186 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2054450921 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2059622452 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2087800914 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2095879987 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2106571355 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2111964574 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2114930703 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2119868775 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2142918454 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2144322007 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2156410023 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2157804517 @default.
• W2025693764 cites W2158210140 @default.
• W2025693764 doi "https://doi.org/10.2217/cer.14.45" @default.
• W2025693764 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25350795" @default.
• W2025693764 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2025693764 type Work @default.
• W2025693764 sameAs 2025693764 @default.
• W2025693764 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2025693764 countsByYear W20256937642015 @default.
• W2025693764 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2025693764 hasAuthorship W2025693764A5002773830 @default.
• W2025693764 hasAuthorship W2025693764A5065289402 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C2779466945 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C2910468371 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C121608353 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C126322002 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C126894567 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C17744445 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C199539241 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C2779466945 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C2779473830 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C2780192828 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C2910468371 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C61434518 @default.
• W2025693764 hasConceptScore W2025693764C71924100 @default.
• W2025693764 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2025693764 hasLocation W20256937641 @default.
• W2025693764 hasLocation W20256937642 @default.
• W2025693764 hasOpenAccess W2025693764 @default.
• W2025693764 hasPrimaryLocation W20256937641 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W1967410728 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2068509057 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2078797104 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2111952090 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2169120358 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2395453437 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2402249956 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2559494340 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W2909802736 @default.
• W2025693764 hasRelatedWork W3150909901 @default.
• W2025693764 hasVolume "3" @default.
• W2025693764 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2025693764 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2025693764 magId "2025693764" @default.
• W2025693764 workType "article" @default.