|
Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 13-16
|
Prevention of genital prolapse following Burch colposuspension: Comparison between two surgical procedures
|
Author keywords
Burch colposuspension; Cul de sac obliteration; Prevention of anatomical defects
|
Indexed keywords
ADULT;
AGED;
APPROXIMATION OF THE SACROUTERINE LIGAMENT;
ARTICLE;
BURCH COLPOSUSPENSION;
COLPOSUSPENSION;
COMPARATIVE STUDY;
CONTROLLED STUDY;
CUL DE SAC OBLITERATION;
ENTEROCELE;
FOLLOW UP;
HUMAN;
INTERMETHOD COMPARISON;
MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY;
MOSCHOCOWITZ PROCEDURE;
PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE;
POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION;
POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD;
PRIORITY JOURNAL;
PROPHYLAXIS;
STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;
SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;
UTERUS PROLAPSE;
VAGINAL VAULT PROLAPSE;
FEMALE;
RECTOUTERINE POUCH;
STRESS INCONTINENCE;
TIME;
DOUGLAS' POUCH;
FEMALE;
FOLLOW-UP STUDIES;
HUMANS;
POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS;
TIME FACTORS;
URINARY INCONTINENCE, STRESS;
UTERINE PROLAPSE;
|
EID: 0037485947
PISSN: 09373462
EISSN: None
Source Type: Journal
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-002-0999-y Document Type: Article |
Times cited : (6)
|
References (14)
|