Explore › Outcome › Operating Room
Outcome

Operating Room

Also known as: OR - Operating room OT - Operating theater OT - Operating theatre Operating Room Operating Rooms Operating room Operating room (environment) Operating room time Operating theater Operating theatre Operating theatre (environment) Room, Operating +1 more
3 findings 1 paper 4 related entities View in graph →

Related entities

interventions
Robotic sacrocolpopexy1
conditions
Pelvic Organ Prolapse1
populations
Postmenopausal Women1
studys
PMC42665901

Findings (27)

None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →
None
adverse

Robotic sacrocolpopexy had significantly longer laparoscopic procedure time than laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (202.8 vs 178.4 minutes, p=0.030), an average of 24.4 minutes longer, attributable to robot

Effect: adverse; 202.8 min vs 178.4 min

Size: 202.8 min vs 178.4 min
PMC4266590
Finding details → · Paper → · Graph →

Papers (1)