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
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of subureteral injection types in patients with middle- to high-grade vesicoureteral reflux (VUR).
Materials And Methods: Between June 1999 and September 2010, subureteral dextranomer was applied at our clinic to 149 patients (214 refluxing ureters) with grades II, III, and IV VUR. Group 1 consisted of 54 patients (80 ureters), and group 2 consisted of 95 patients (134 ureters). The standard subureteric transurethral injection (STING) procedure was applied to group 1, and the modified STING procedure was applied to group 2. A second and if needed a third injection was applied to unsuccessfully treated patients. The mean follow-up period was 2 years. Patients were evaluated by cystography and ultrasonography in the third month of follow-up.
Results: VUR was resolved completely after a single injection in 54/80 ureters (67.5%) in group 1 and in 94/134 ureters (70.1%) in group 2. Overall successes after a second or a third injection were 61/80 (76.2%) and 111/134 (82.8%), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups only for grade IV reflux following multiple injections (p<0.05).
Conclusions: Endoscopic treatment of VUR is a recommended treatment because it is minimally invasive, efficient, and repeatable. Our study confirmed that a modified STING procedure can be an alternative treatment to the standard technique.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4165925 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2014.55.9.615 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!