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 ultrasound appearances of primary hepatocellular carcinoma in 32 patients are described. Attempts to correlate the appearances with serological, histological, and arteriographic findings revealed no consistent pattern. There appears to be no great difference in the range of ultrasound appearances in primary hepatocellular carcinoma when compared with that reported for metastatic disease. The findings suggest that in patients with cirrhosis, ultrasound is a sensitive method for the detection and accurate location of hepatocellular carcinoma, but that in these patients the echo pattern provides little help in the differentiation of primary from secondary carcinoma. Our study has revealed four different echo patterns in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: echofree (47%), echogenic (23%), mixed (175) and diffuse infiltration 13%).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-54-640-307 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!