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
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has a curative effect in patients undergoing pneumonectomy for lung cancer. Nevertheless, the contribution of PR to the clinical status of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) undergoing lung resection has not been adequately elucidated. The aim of this systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials was to appraise the impact of PR compared to conventional treatment based on postoperative clinical status in patients with lung cancer and COPD. Literature in English from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, and Embase databases and in Chinese from the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and the WANFANG Database was retrieved from inception to November 2021, employing the keywords "Pulmonary Neoplasms," "Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases," "Physical Therapy Modalities," and "pulmonary rehabilitation." Only studies that reported PR results were included. This review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (number: CRD42021224343). A total of nine controlled trials with 651 patients were included. Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) were the primary outcome measure. PR decreased the risk of complications after surgery compared to regular treatment (odds ratio (OR) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-0.37, < 0.01). PR reduced the risk of pneumonia after surgery compared to regular treatment (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.86, =0.02). There was a significant difference in the postoperative length of stay (mean difference -2.13 days, 95% CI -2.65 to -1.61 days, < 0.05). PR was an effective intervention that decreased PPCs in patients suffering from lung cancer and COPD. However, due to the limitations of the available data, the results should be interpreted with caution.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9122671 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4133237 | DOI Listing |