Retropubic versus transobturator MUS: time to revisit?

Gunnar Lose; Niels Klarskov

doi:10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7

Retropubic versus transobturator MUS: time to revisit?

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

4 Citations (Scopus)

Original language	English
Journal	International Urogynecology Journal
Volume	28
Issue number	8
Pages (from-to)	1113-1114
Number of pages	2
ISSN	0937-3462
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7
Publication status	Published - 2017

Keywords

Editorial

Access to Document

10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7

Cite this

@article{525fa001c70f4da38481554408d37080,

title = "Retropubic versus transobturator MUS: time to revisit?",

keywords = "Editorial",

author = "Gunnar Lose and Niels Klarskov",

year = "2017",

doi = "10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7",

language = "English",

volume = "28",

pages = "1113--1114",

journal = "International Urogynecology Journal",

issn = "0937-3462",

publisher = "Springer Nature",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Retropubic versus transobturator MUS

T2 - time to revisit?

AU - Lose, Gunnar

AU - Klarskov, Niels

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

KW - Editorial

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85021786172

U2 - 10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7

DO - 10.1007/s00192-017-3403-7

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28676935

SN - 0937-3462

VL - 28

SP - 1113

EP - 1114

JO - International Urogynecology Journal

JF - International Urogynecology Journal

IS - 8

ER -

Retropubic versus transobturator MUS: time to revisit?

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this