FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2301565670> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2301565670 endingPage "674" @default.
• W2301565670 startingPage "670" @default.
• W2301565670 abstract "No AccessJournal of Urology1 Mar 1994Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Review of 103 Consecutive Casesis companion ofRe: Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Review of 103 Consecutive Cases by D. B. Rukstalis, G. S. Gerber, N. J. Vogelzang, D. J. Haraf F. H. Strauss, II and G. W. Chodak J. Urol., 151: 670-674, 1994Reply by Authors Daniel B. Rukstalis, Glenn S. Gerber, Nicholas J. Vogelzang, Daniel J. Haraf, Francis H. Straus, and Gerald W. Chodak Daniel B. RukstalisDaniel B. Rukstalis More articles by this author , Glenn S. GerberGlenn S. Gerber More articles by this author , Nicholas J. VogelzangNicholas J. Vogelzang More articles by this author , Daniel J. HarafDaniel J. Haraf More articles by this author , Francis H. StrausFrancis H. Straus More articles by this author , and Gerald W. ChodakGerald W. Chodak More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)35044-9AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection is a recently introduced technique for the surgical evaluation of the regional pelvic lymph nodes in genitourinary malignancies. We report the results of a laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection performed on 103 consecutive patients for staging of clinically localized prostatic, bladder and penile carcinomas. In 20 patients (group 1) the adequacy of the laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection was evaluated with a subsequent open dissection. In this group 87 to 95% of the lymph nodes within a modified template could be reliably removed laparoscopically. In 73 patients (group 2) laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection was performed as a solitary operation. Mean hospitalization was 1.6 ± 2.4 days, while postoperative narcotic requirements were minimal. Mean operative time for bilateral laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection was 156 ± 41.2 minutes. The overall complication rate in these 2 groups was 13.5%. Group 3 includes 10 patients (9.7% of the total) in whom laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection was unsuccessful. The minimally invasive surgical techniques of laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection seem to provide adequate staging accuracy in patients with genitourinary neoplasms. The complication rate and recovery period appear to be decreased relative to those for open surgical lymphadenectomy. © 1994 by The American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byMENG M and CARROLL P (2018) WHEN IS PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION NECESSARY BEFORE RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY? A DECISION ANALYSISJournal of Urology, VOL. 164, NO. 4, (1235-1240), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2000.Raboy A, Adler H and Albert P (2018) EXTRAPERITONEAL ENDOSCOPIC PELVIC LYMPH NODE DISSECTION A REVIEW OF 125 PATIENTSJournal of Urology, VOL. 158, NO. 6, (2202-2205), Online publication date: 1-Dec-1997.Herrell D, Trachtenberg J and Theodorescu D (2018) Staging Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Localized Carcinoma of the Prostate: A Comparison of 3 Surgical TechniquesJournal of Urology, VOL. 157, NO. 4, (1337-1339), Online publication date: 1-Apr-1997.Parra R, Perez M, Boullier J and Cummings J (2018) Comparison Between Standard Flank Versus Laparoscopic Nephrectomy for Benign Renal DiseaseJournal of Urology, VOL. 153, NO. 4, (1171-1174), Online publication date: 1-Apr-1995.Stone N, Stock R and Unger P (2018) Indications for Seminal Vesicle Biopsy and Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Men With Localized Carcinoma of ProstateJournal of Urology, VOL. 154, NO. 4, (1392-1396), Online publication date: 1-Oct-1995.Gill I, Clayman R and McDougall E (2018) Advances in Urological LaparoscopyJournal of Urology, VOL. 154, NO. 4, (1275-1294), Online publication date: 1-Oct-1995.Related articlesJournal of Urology13 Nov 2018Re: Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Review of 103 Consecutive Cases by D. B. Rukstalis, G. S. Gerber, N. J. Vogelzang, D. J. Haraf F. H. Strauss, II and G. W. Chodak J. Urol., 151: 670-674, 1994Journal of Urology13 Nov 2018Reply by Authors Volume 151Issue 3March 1994Page: 670-674 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 1994 by The American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsbladder neoplasmsperitoneoscopypenile neoplasmslymph node excisionprostatic neoplasmsMetricsAuthor Information Daniel B. Rukstalis More articles by this author Glenn S. Gerber More articles by this author Nicholas J. Vogelzang More articles by this author Daniel J. Haraf More articles by this author Francis H. Straus More articles by this author Gerald W. Chodak More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2301565670 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5026242562 @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5027190996 @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5038481817 @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5059219836 @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5060583554 @default.
• W2301565670 creator A5063560591 @default.
• W2301565670 date "1994-03-01" @default.
• W2301565670 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2301565670 title "Laparoscopic Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection: A Review of 103 Consecutive Cases" @default.
• W2301565670 cites W1259141303 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W190857994 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W1984223177 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2020160645 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2033412483 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2086051135 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2412735799 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2413878057 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2414374256 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2414736579 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2416455276 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2418628574 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2418785680 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2439111188 @default.
• W2301565670 cites W2469203591 @default.
• W2301565670 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)35044-9" @default.
• W2301565670 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7508525" @default.
• W2301565670 hasPublicationYear "1994" @default.
• W2301565670 type Work @default.
• W2301565670 sameAs 2301565670 @default.
• W2301565670 citedByCount "56" @default.
• W2301565670 countsByYear W23015656702012 @default.
• W2301565670 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5026242562 @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5027190996 @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5038481817 @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5059219836 @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5060583554 @default.
• W2301565670 hasAuthorship W2301565670A5063560591 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C105702510 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C133507102 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C2775862295 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C2779720271 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C2780047204 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C2780849966 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C105702510 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C126322002 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C133507102 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C141071460 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C142724271 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C2775862295 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C2779720271 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C2780047204 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C2780849966 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C61434518 @default.
• W2301565670 hasConceptScore W2301565670C71924100 @default.
• W2301565670 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2301565670 hasLocation W23015656701 @default.
• W2301565670 hasLocation W23015656702 @default.
• W2301565670 hasOpenAccess W2301565670 @default.
• W2301565670 hasPrimaryLocation W23015656701 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W1995077203 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2049980496 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2053411225 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2106281891 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2375123603 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2407009057 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2410322542 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W2508074852 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W4213331572 @default.
• W2301565670 hasRelatedWork W4375945952 @default.
• W2301565670 hasVolume "151" @default.
• W2301565670 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2301565670 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2301565670 magId "2301565670" @default.
• W2301565670 workType "article" @default.