Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&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
In order for a radiologist to create reports that are meaningful to facial reconstructive surgeons, an understanding of the principles that guide surgical management and the hardware employed is imperative. This article is intended to promote efficient and salient reporting by illustrating surgical approaches and rationale. Hardware selection can be inferred and a defined set of potential complications anticipated when assessing the adequacy of surgical reconstruction on postoperative computed tomography for midface, internal orbital, and mandible fractures.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nic.2021.08.004 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!