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
Evaluation of axillary lymph nodes for metastatic involvement is the most significant factor in gauging prognosis in breast cancer patients. Complete axillary dissection can be associated with significant morbidity. Therefore, sentinel node biopsy was developed to sample nodes and avoid dissection in patients without clinical evidence of nodal involvement. While most surgeons currently perform the procedure, the technique remains unstandardized. Sentinel node identification rates, false-negative rates and procedural complication rates are the main outcomes measured and can depend significantly on variations in technique. Future studies on sentinel lymph node biopsy will probably focus on clarifying accuracy of the procedure in different clinical settings, delineating standard technical practice guidelines and further achieving improved outcomes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1586/14737167.7.5.469 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!