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
The midurethral sling has gained popularity and is the most commonly used treatment of women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Whether intrinsic sphincteric deficiency (ISD) still should be used in the preoperative evaluation of patients with SUI and whether it should be considered as a predictor of success in patients undergoing a midurethral sling procedure and as a guide in the choice of surgical approach (retropubic vs transobturator) remain controversial. This article reviews and discusses the definitions of ISD and the latest research into the role of ISD determination in the era of the midurethral sling.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11934-011-0211-3 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!