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
Thirty-three consecutive patients with aortic stenosis underwent a 16-row spiral CT scan. Aortic valve planimetry was performed using two methods: double-oblique reformation (DO) and 2D-curved multiplanar reconstruction using advanced vessel analysis software (VA). The mean aortic valve area determined by transthoracic echocardiography was 0.88+/-0.34 [0.53-1.88] and did not differ significantly from that determined by CT (DO): 0.87+/-0.38 [0.42-1.93] (p=0.75) or CT (VA): 0.87+/-0.38 [0.44-2.00] (p=0.69). This study demonstrates that 16-row spiral CT scan is a feasible, accurate and reproducible method for aortic valve planimetry in patients with aortic stenosis. Both methods show similar accuracy but the VA method takes slightly longer.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.03.095 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!