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
Convective treatments (high-flux hemodialysis (HD), hemodiafiltration and hemofiltration) are characterized by enhanced removal of middle and large molecular weight solutes compared with conventional low-flux HD. As these molecules are claimed to play an important role in the genesis of many complications of chronic HD, the availability of these techniques represented an intriguing innovation and a possible means to improve the still poor prognosis of HD patients. Here we will critically review the most important published studies comparing convective treatments with low-flux HD on chronic morbidity, preservation of residual renal function, and long-term survival.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4758.2006.01188.x | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!