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: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Lymph node metastases are relatively common in thyroid carcinoma, but retropharyngeal nodes (RPN) are rare. Management may be surgical or non-surgical, according to the context of the disease.
Methods: Systematic review of cases reported in the literature and report of 5 cases.
Results: Most case series report surgical management, via a cervical or transoral approach. RPN was the specific object of 26 case series, with a total of 85 patients, with surgery performed in 22/26 studies. Our 5 cases illustrated various strategies in the multidisciplinary management, with surgery for three patients (also with (131)I in one case), targeted therapy for one patient with concurrent distant metastases, and watch and wait for one elderly patient.
Conclusions: Management of RPN is not always surgical. Discussion of options in a multidisciplinary tumor board setting may optimize care.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-2947-2 | DOI Listing |