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
Lung metastasectomy is considered a safe and potentially curative procedure despite there is not a strong evidence that metastasectomy prolongs long-term survival in patients with lung metastases. Moreover, the debate is open regarding the best approach for lung metastasectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery versus open approach. A systematic review of literature to clarify what is the best approach to prolong survival in patients with lung metastases was performed. Our study confirms that overall survival is equivalent for video-assisted thoracic surgery and thoracotomy, therefore the 'gold standard' surgical treatment for lung metastases remains a point of debate. The choice of the surgical approach still depends more on the single center or surgeon practice than on strong scientific evidence. A prospective randomized trial could clarify the question.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/fon.14.257 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!