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: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
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
Background: We wondered whether noncontrast CT performs better than the intravenous urogram (IVU) in the detection of urinary calculi.
Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken in order to answer the above question. Both primary and secondary sources of evidence were searched. The retrieved evidence was then appraised.
Results: The strongest evidence was in a meta-analysis by Worster and colleagues (level 1a evidence according to the Oxford/CEBM levels of evidence). This was an analysis of four studies with a total of 296 patients who underwent intravenous urogram and noncontrast CT. This study shows that CT has better diagnostic performance than IVU for the detection of urinary stones.
Conclusions: The literature suggests that CT should be utilized in preference to IVU for patients with suspected urolithiasis.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-007-9307-0 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!