Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In this study, we elucidated the efficacy of our prophylactic method for wound infection in pull-percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG). The total 29 patients received the pull-PEG. The first 8 patients received the oral sterilization with povidone iodine and antibiotics at the time of pull-PEG (Group-I). The frequency of wound infection in this group was 50.0% (4/8). It was revealed that all infections were induced by methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). 3 patients were MRSA positive in the throat. In Group-II, we eradicated MRSA in the throat before the pull-PEG by combination mupirocin calcium hydrate with the Group-I treatment. In contrast in Group-I, the frequency of wound infection was significantly reduced in Group-II (4.8%: 1/21). The results showed that our eradication method was very useful for prevention of the wound infection in pull-PEG treatment.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!