Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial

To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional l...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) Jg. 120; H. 3; S. 604
Hauptverfasser:	Sarlos, Dimitri, Kots, LaVonne, Stevanovic, Nebojsa, von Felten, Stefanie, Schär, Gabriel
Format:	Journal Article
Sprache:	Englisch
Veröffentlicht:	United States 01.09.2012
Schlagworte:	Adult Analgesics - therapeutic use Blood Loss, Surgical - statistics & numerical data Female Humans Hysterectomy - methods Laparoscopy - methods Middle Aged Outcome Assessment (Health Care) Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy Pain, Postoperative - epidemiology Pain, Postoperative - etiology Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Postoperative Complications - etiology Quality of Life Recovery of Function Robotics Time Factors
ISSN:	1873-233X, 1873-233X
Online-Zugang:	Weitere Angaben
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

Abstract	To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life. Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (± standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (± 29; 103) compared with 75 (± 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (± 10; 13) compared with 5 (± 14; 5) (conventional group). Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups.
AbstractList	To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy.OBJECTIVETo compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy.For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life.METHODSFor this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life.Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (± standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (± 29; 103) compared with 75 (± 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (± 10; 13) compared with 5 (± 14; 5) (conventional group).RESULTSNinety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (± standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (± 29; 103) compared with 75 (± 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (± 10; 13) compared with 5 (± 14; 5) (conventional group).Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups.CONCLUSIONRobot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups. To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. For this controlled clinical trial, patients with benign indications for hysterectomy were randomized to receive either a robotic (robotic group) or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (conventional group). The primary end point was total operating time; secondary end points were perioperative outcome, blood loss, and the change in quality of life. Ninety-five patients out of 100 randomized patients completed the study. Patient age, body mass index, and uterus weight showed no significant differences between both groups. All results are given as mean (± standard deviation; median). Total operating time for the robotic group was significantly higher with 106 (± 29; 103) compared with 75 (± 21; 74) (conventional group) minutes. Blood loss, complications, analgesics use, and return to activity for both groups were comparable. The change in preoperative to postoperative quality-of-life index (quality of life measured on a linear scale from 0 to 100) was significantly higher in the robotic group, with 13 (± 10; 13) compared with 5 (± 14; 5) (conventional group). Robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopy compare well in most surgical aspects, but the robotic procedure is associated with longer operating times. Postoperative quality-of-life index was better; however, long-term, there was no difference. However, subjective postoperative parameters such as analgesic use and return to activity showed no significant difference between both groups.
Author	Kots, LaVonne Stevanovic, Nebojsa Schär, Gabriel von Felten, Stefanie Sarlos, Dimitri
Author_xml	– sequence: 1 givenname: Dimitri surname: Sarlos fullname: Sarlos, Dimitri email: Dimitri.Sarlos@ksa.ch organization: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland. Dimitri.Sarlos@ksa.ch – sequence: 2 givenname: LaVonne surname: Kots fullname: Kots, LaVonne – sequence: 3 givenname: Nebojsa surname: Stevanovic fullname: Stevanovic, Nebojsa – sequence: 4 givenname: Stefanie surname: von Felten fullname: von Felten, Stefanie – sequence: 5 givenname: Gabriel surname: Schär fullname: Schär, Gabriel
BackLink	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22914470$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark	eNpNkF9LwzAUxYNM3B_9BiJ99KUzN2nTxLcxdAqDgSgIPpQkzVglbWqSKfPTG3CCT_dc7u8cDneKRr3rDUKXgOeARXWz2KzmWGGghgInrFQM5AmaAK9oTih9Hf3TYzQN4R1jDEzQMzQmREBRVHiC3p6ccrHVmXbdIL1psq827tLWf5o-tq6XNrMyXVzQbkjc7hCi8UZH1x1uM5l52Teua7-TM5mid9YmGX0r7Tk63UobzMVxztDL_d3z8iFfb1aPy8U61zQVz5ngSpQN45yVhjGimlILQolmXIqiaqAQW8IVkVQrrHSzBV5UkCBFQYHGZIauf3MH7z72JsS6a4M21sreuH2oAdMScFFWPKFXR3SvOtPUg2876Q_130PID5-OZ0k
CitedBy_id	crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ijgo_2013_03_011 crossref_primary_10_1097_JCMA_0000000000000760 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0188812 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ijgo_2015_11_010 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_023_01631_w crossref_primary_10_1097_GRF_0000000000000149 crossref_primary_10_1097_GCO_0000000000000293 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejogrb_2014_03_010 crossref_primary_10_1002_ijgo_12001 crossref_primary_10_12998_wjcc_v5_i5_172 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000000311 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00404_021_06360_9 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2016_01_002 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00192_015_2763_0 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_asjsur_2019_05_003 crossref_primary_10_7326_M20_7006 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_015_0526_z crossref_primary_10_1111_jog_15741 crossref_primary_10_4103_JRIS_JRIS_13_24 crossref_primary_10_1002_rcs_1648 crossref_primary_10_1245_s10434_020_08475_w crossref_primary_10_1002_hsr2_70137 crossref_primary_10_4103_ija_IJA_96_18 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2014_07_010 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2023_11_016 crossref_primary_10_1111_tog_12277 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2015_05_003 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2015_05_004 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_017_0725_x crossref_primary_10_3390_jpm13010029 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2016_06_005 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2013_02_008 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_023_01724_6 crossref_primary_10_4103_JRIS_JRIS_16_24 crossref_primary_10_1200_JCO_2015_65_3212 crossref_primary_10_4103_jmas_jmas_253_22 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00404_012_2681_z crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2017_09_016 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ygyno_2015_07_013 crossref_primary_10_1097_GRF_0000000000000967 crossref_primary_10_1002_rcs_2103 crossref_primary_10_1111_1471_0528_12836 crossref_primary_10_1097_JHQ_0000000000000017 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2014_08_003 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2014_01_016 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ogc_2022_02_009 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2014_06_002 crossref_primary_10_1097_GRF_0000000000000283 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ijgo_2016_06_016 crossref_primary_10_31083_j_ceog5003061 crossref_primary_10_3389_fsurg_2016_00026 crossref_primary_10_4137_CMRH_S10850 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_016_4752_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2016_05_008 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000004048 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000000244 crossref_primary_10_3389_fsurg_2025_1625404 crossref_primary_10_1186_s10397_017_1008_2 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2016_03_005 crossref_primary_10_1245_s10434_018_6997_1 crossref_primary_10_1007_s13669_014_0098_3 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2015_08_003 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0b013e3182841594 crossref_primary_10_1002_ijgo_70310 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_013_3306_8 crossref_primary_10_1097_GRF_0000000000000274 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0191628 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_025_02581_1 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2020_10_021 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ygyno_2014_10_016 crossref_primary_10_1080_13645706_2021_2010763 crossref_primary_10_1136_rapm_2018_100024 crossref_primary_10_1002_rcs_1675 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_021_01340_2 crossref_primary_10_1002_ijgo_12325 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_023_10275_8 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0b013e31829ecb6a crossref_primary_10_1097_OGX_0000000000000237 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00238_013_0851_2 crossref_primary_10_1186_s13561_019_0236_8 crossref_primary_10_1002_bjs5_50352 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_016_0625_5 crossref_primary_10_3389_fsurg_2024_1308489 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_014_3496_8 crossref_primary_10_1097_01_AOG_0000461761_47981_07 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00404_014_3494_z crossref_primary_10_1016_j_suc_2019_11_003 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000003578 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_tjog_2014_11_013 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_whi_2020_02_003 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_023_01673_0 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_bpobgyn_2017_10_001 crossref_primary_10_31083_j_ceog5102047 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10353_020_00650_3 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_fertnstert_2014_08_010 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2012_12_007 crossref_primary_10_1111_ijcp_12492 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2015_02_012 crossref_primary_10_3390_medicina59020411 crossref_primary_10_1097_IGC_0000000000000458 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejogrb_2017_07_012 crossref_primary_10_1007_s13669_016_0182_y crossref_primary_10_1097_GRF_0000000000000489 crossref_primary_10_1111_aas_12516 crossref_primary_10_3390_jpm12122042 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_013_3342_4 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_bpobgyn_2023_102366 crossref_primary_10_1089_gyn_2013_0037 crossref_primary_10_3390_healthcare13070720 crossref_primary_10_4103_GMIT_GMIT_43_19 crossref_primary_10_1245_s10434_015_4428_0 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_014_0454_3 crossref_primary_10_1080_01443615_2022_2070732 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0b013e318280da64 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0b013e3182a4ee4d crossref_primary_10_1016_j_bpobgyn_2017_09_011 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2018_08_019 crossref_primary_10_1136_ijgc_2018_000098 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2018_01_010 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00464_016_4966_y crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejogrb_2023_08_003 crossref_primary_10_1097_AOG_0000000000004401 crossref_primary_10_1002_ijgo_14217 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2013_07_009 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_013_0418_z crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejogrb_2015_09_030 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_017_0674_4 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2021_01_017 crossref_primary_10_1097_SLE_0000000000000248 crossref_primary_10_1007_s11701_019_00948_9 crossref_primary_10_1007_s13669_015_0126_y crossref_primary_10_3390_medicina58040552 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajog_2016_06_027 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00423_022_02523_7 crossref_primary_10_1097_GCO_0000000000000080 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jmig_2018_08_025
ContentType	Journal Article
DBID	CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8
DOI	10.1097/AOG.0b013e318265b61a
DatabaseName	Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle	MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList	MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE
Database_xml	– sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod	no_fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline	Medicine
EISSN	1873-233X
ExternalDocumentID	22914470
Genre	Randomized Controlled Trial Journal Article Comparative Study
GroupedDBID	--- --K .3C .55 .GJ .XZ .Z2 01R 0R~ 123 1B1 1CY 1J1 1~5 29N 2CO 354 3O- 4.4 40H 4G. 4Q1 4Q2 4Q3 53G 5RE 5VS 7-5 77Y 7O~ 85S AAAAV AAAXR AACTN AAEDT AAGIX AAHPQ AAIQE AAJCS AALRI AAMOA AAMTA AAQFI AAQKA AAQQT AAQXK AARTV AASCR AASOK AASXQ AAUEB AAWTL AAXQO AAXUO ABASU ABBUW ABDIG ABDPE ABJNI ABMAC ABVCZ ABWVN ABXVJ ABZAD ACCJW ACDDN ACEWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIJW ACILI ACIUM ACLDA ACOAL ACRPL ACWDW ACWRI ACXJB ACXNZ ADBBV ADFPA ADGGA ADHPY ADMUD ADNKB ADNMO AE3 AEBDS AEETU AENEX AFDTB AFEXH AFFNX AFSOK AFTJW AFUWQ AGINI AGNAY AHOMT AHQNM AHRYX AHVBC AIJEX AINUH AJCLO AJIOK AJNWD AJNYG AJZMW AKCTQ AKRWK AKULP ALKUP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALMTX AMJPA AMKUR AMNEI AOHHW AWKKM BAWUL BOYCO BQLVK BS7 BYPQX C45 CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIWNM DU5 DUNZO E.X EBS ECM EEVPB EIF EJD ERAAH EX3 F2K F2L F2M F2N F5P FCALG FD6 FDB FEDTE FGOYB FL- FW0 GNXGY GQDEL H0~ HLJTE HVGLF HZ~ IHE IKREB IKYAY IN~ IPNFZ JF9 JG8 JK3 JK8 K-A K-F K8S KD2 KMI L-C L7B M18 M41 MZP N4W N9A NEJ NPM NQ- N~7 N~B N~M O9- OAG OAH OBH OCUKA ODA ODMTH OHH OHT OHYEH OJAPA OL1 OLB OLG OLH OLU OLV OLW OLY OLZ OPUJH ORVUJ OUVQU OVD OVDNE OVIDH OVLEI OVOZU OWBYB OWU OWV OWX OWY OWZ OXXIT P-K P2P PKN R2- R58 RIG RLZ ROL RPZ S4R S4S SSZ TEORI TSPGW TWZ UHB V2I VVN W3M WH7 WOQ WOW X3V X3W X7M XPP XXN XYM YQJ ZB8 ZGI ZXP ZZMQN ~S- 7X8 ABPXF ACDOF ACZKN ADKSD AFNMH
ID	FETCH-LOGICAL-c3826-698b95d68865e662bd5c9232c68a947d149f28b2a3cb0bcdf18471d5cb31b1c02
IEDL.DBID	7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount	163
ISICitedReferencesURI	http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=00006250-201209000-00016&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN	1873-233X
IngestDate	Mon Sep 08 15:34:51 EDT 2025 Wed Feb 19 01:49:06 EST 2025
IsPeerReviewed	true
IsScholarly	true
Issue	3
Language	English
LinkModel	DirectLink
MergedId	FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3826-698b95d68865e662bd5c9232c68a947d149f28b2a3cb0bcdf18471d5cb31b1c02
Notes	ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3
PMID	22914470
PQID	1035104578
PQPubID	23479
ParticipantIDs	proquest_miscellaneous_1035104578 pubmed_primary_22914470
PublicationCentury	2000
PublicationDate	2012-September-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD	2012-09-01
PublicationDate_xml	– month: 09 year: 2012 text: 2012-September-01 day: 01
PublicationDecade	2010
PublicationPlace	United States
PublicationPlace_xml	– name: United States
PublicationTitle	Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)
PublicationTitleAlternate	Obstet Gynecol
PublicationYear	2012
SSID	ssj0001693
Score	2.4682252
Snippet	To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. For this controlled... To compare surgical outcome and quality of life of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy.OBJECTIVETo compare...
SourceID	proquest pubmed
SourceType	Aggregation Database Index Database
StartPage	604
SubjectTerms	Adult Analgesics - therapeutic use Blood Loss, Surgical - statistics & numerical data Female Humans Hysterectomy - methods Laparoscopy - methods Middle Aged Outcome Assessment (Health Care) Pain, Postoperative - drug therapy Pain, Postoperative - epidemiology Pain, Postoperative - etiology Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Postoperative Complications - etiology Quality of Life Recovery of Function Robotics Time Factors
Title	Robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial
URI	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22914470 https://www.proquest.com/docview/1035104578
Volume	120
WOSCitedRecordID	wos00006250-201209000-00016&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings	1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link	http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1JS8NAFB7UinhxX-rGCF4Hm5lkMuNFirgcbC2iEPAQZgsW2qRaFfTX-yYL9SIIXkIgM5A8vnl7vofQiecgF9IqYgXVJJRaE5lJQSLNbKCUiKwpKfNv435fJIkc1Am3ad1W2ejEUlHbwvgcOZxuBvAJAWDnkxfip0b56mo9QmMetRi4Mh7VcTJjC_dEIz7gEjEjlLGk-XVOxqfdu-tZDpDySPNA_e5klsbmavW_r7mGVmo3E3crXKyjOZdvoKVeXUjfRE_3hS7gGW560LFPyOKfPeh4BHbUc10WE1j37BmfvXYsxp9nWGEwcbYYD79gZ93tPoLbcgbIFnq8uny4uCH1nAViGHw74VJoGVkuBI8c51TbyIDfRw0XSoaxhSAqo0JTxYzuaGOzwJs0WKRZoAPTodtoIS9yt4swOIcOAsTQyE4GQlBSMxcJF-vYMQ7RUxsdN2JLAce-OKFyV7xP05ng2minkn06qQg3UkolxH1xZ-8Pu_fRMvg0tGoDO0CtDE6xO0SL5uNtOH09KgEC1_6g9w1uzsX9
linkProvider	ProQuest
openUrl	ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robotic+compared+with+conventional+laparoscopic+hysterectomy%3A+a+randomized+controlled+trial&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics+and+gynecology+%28New+York.+1953%29&rft.au=Sarlos%2C+Dimitri&rft.au=Kots%2C+LaVonne&rft.au=Stevanovic%2C+Nebojsa&rft.au=von+Felten%2C+Stefanie&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.issn=1873-233X&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft.volume=120&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=604&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097%2FAOG.0b013e318265b61a&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon
thumbnail_m	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon
thumbnail_s	http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1873-233X&client=summon