Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis
Objectives To meta-analyze complication rate in computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsy and associated risk factors. Methods Four databases were searched from 1/2000 to 8/2015 for studies reporting complications in CT-guided lung biopsy. Overall and major complication rates were po...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European radiology 2017-01, Vol.27 (1), p.138-148 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 148 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 138 |
| container_title | European radiology |
| container_volume | 27 |
| creator | Heerink, W. J. de Bock, G. H. de Jonge, G. J. Groen, H. J. M. Vliegenthart, R. Oudkerk, M. |
| description | Objectives
To meta-analyze complication rate in computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsy and associated risk factors.
Methods
Four databases were searched from 1/2000 to 8/2015 for studies reporting complications in CT-guided lung biopsy. Overall and major complication rates were pooled and compared between core biopsy and fine needle aspiration (FNA) using the random-effects model. Risk factors for complications in core biopsy and FNA were identified in meta-regression analysis.
Results
For core biopsy, 32 articles (8,133 procedures) were included and for FNA, 17 (4,620 procedures). Pooled overall complication rates for core biopsy and FNA were 38.8 % (95 % CI: 34.3–43.5 %) and 24.0 % (95 % CI: 18.2–30.8 %), respectively. Major complication rates were 5.7 % (95 % CI: 4.4–7.4 %) and 4.4 % (95 % CI: 2.7–7.0 %), respectively. Overall complication rate was higher for core biopsy compared to FNA (
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5127875</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1850769524</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-1b0a2566f6b00fcfe7367efe797936e39ed157ee5303ed663964625a07090e3e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1r3DAQhkVpSTYfP6CXYuglFyWjb6uHQlmSJhDoJTkLrT3eKNjWVrIL---jZZOQFgo5zWGeeTWjh5DPDM4ZgLnIAEIABaapFMrQ-gNZMCk4ZVDLj2QBVtTUWCsPyVHOjwBgmTQH5JCbQnBrF-R6GYdNHxo_hThWyU-Yq9hVyzu6nkOLbTUlP-bpISbfhKbq53FdrULc5O23asDJUz_6fptDPiGfOt9nPH2ux-T-6vJueU1vf_28Wf64pY3SdqJsBZ4rrTu9AuiaDo3QBkuxxgqNwmLLlEFUAgS2WgurpebKgwELKFAck-_73M28GrBtcCwb9m6TwuDT1kUf3N-dMTy4dfzjFOOmNqoEnD0HpPh7xjy5IeQG-96PGOfsWK3AaKu4fAfKta6ZrqGgX_9BH-Ocyt_sKCmVtMbsKLanmhRzTti97s3A7ZS6vVJXlLqdUleXmS9vD36deHFYAL4HcmmNa0xvnv5v6hPg6atl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1844549770</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Heerink, W. J. ; de Bock, G. H. ; de Jonge, G. J. ; Groen, H. J. M. ; Vliegenthart, R. ; Oudkerk, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Heerink, W. J. ; de Bock, G. H. ; de Jonge, G. J. ; Groen, H. J. M. ; Vliegenthart, R. ; Oudkerk, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
To meta-analyze complication rate in computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsy and associated risk factors.
Methods
Four databases were searched from 1/2000 to 8/2015 for studies reporting complications in CT-guided lung biopsy. Overall and major complication rates were pooled and compared between core biopsy and fine needle aspiration (FNA) using the random-effects model. Risk factors for complications in core biopsy and FNA were identified in meta-regression analysis.
Results
For core biopsy, 32 articles (8,133 procedures) were included and for FNA, 17 (4,620 procedures). Pooled overall complication rates for core biopsy and FNA were 38.8 % (95 % CI: 34.3–43.5 %) and 24.0 % (95 % CI: 18.2–30.8 %), respectively. Major complication rates were 5.7 % (95 % CI: 4.4–7.4 %) and 4.4 % (95 % CI: 2.7–7.0 %), respectively. Overall complication rate was higher for core biopsy compared to FNA (
p
< 0.001). For FNA, larger needle diameter was a risk factor for overall complications, and increased traversed lung parenchyma and smaller lesion size were risk factors for major complications. For core biopsy, no significant risk factors were identified.
Conclusions
In CT-guided lung biopsy, minor complications were common and occurred more often in core biopsy than FNA. Major complication rate was low. For FNA, smaller nodule diameter, larger needle diameter and increased traversed lung parenchyma were risk factors for complications.
Key Points
•
Minor complications are common in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
Major complication rate is low in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
CT-guided lung biopsy complications occur more often in core biopsy than FNA
•
Major complication rate is similar in core biopsy and FNA
•
Risk factors for FNA are larger needle diameter, smaller lesion size</description><identifier>ISSN: 0938-7994</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1084</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27108299</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Biopsy ; Biopsy, Fine-Needle - adverse effects ; Biopsy, Large-Core Needle - adverse effects ; Diagnostic Radiology ; Diagnostic tests ; Global Health ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy - adverse effects ; Imaging ; Incidence ; Internal Medicine ; Interventional ; Interventional Radiology ; Lung - diagnostic imaging ; Lung cancer ; Lung Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Medical imaging ; Medical screening ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Neuroradiology ; Pneumothorax ; Pneumothorax - epidemiology ; Radiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk factors ; Tomography ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods ; Ultrasound</subject><ispartof>European radiology, 2017-01, Vol.27 (1), p.138-148</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2016</rights><rights>European Radiology is a copyright of Springer, 2017.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-1b0a2566f6b00fcfe7367efe797936e39ed157ee5303ed663964625a07090e3e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-1b0a2566f6b00fcfe7367efe797936e39ed157ee5303ed663964625a07090e3e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27108299$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heerink, W. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Bock, G. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jonge, G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Groen, H. J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vliegenthart, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oudkerk, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis</title><title>European radiology</title><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><description>Objectives
To meta-analyze complication rate in computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsy and associated risk factors.
Methods
Four databases were searched from 1/2000 to 8/2015 for studies reporting complications in CT-guided lung biopsy. Overall and major complication rates were pooled and compared between core biopsy and fine needle aspiration (FNA) using the random-effects model. Risk factors for complications in core biopsy and FNA were identified in meta-regression analysis.
Results
For core biopsy, 32 articles (8,133 procedures) were included and for FNA, 17 (4,620 procedures). Pooled overall complication rates for core biopsy and FNA were 38.8 % (95 % CI: 34.3–43.5 %) and 24.0 % (95 % CI: 18.2–30.8 %), respectively. Major complication rates were 5.7 % (95 % CI: 4.4–7.4 %) and 4.4 % (95 % CI: 2.7–7.0 %), respectively. Overall complication rate was higher for core biopsy compared to FNA (
p
< 0.001). For FNA, larger needle diameter was a risk factor for overall complications, and increased traversed lung parenchyma and smaller lesion size were risk factors for major complications. For core biopsy, no significant risk factors were identified.
Conclusions
In CT-guided lung biopsy, minor complications were common and occurred more often in core biopsy than FNA. Major complication rate was low. For FNA, smaller nodule diameter, larger needle diameter and increased traversed lung parenchyma were risk factors for complications.
Key Points
•
Minor complications are common in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
Major complication rate is low in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
CT-guided lung biopsy complications occur more often in core biopsy than FNA
•
Major complication rate is similar in core biopsy and FNA
•
Risk factors for FNA are larger needle diameter, smaller lesion size</description><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Biopsy, Fine-Needle - adverse effects</subject><subject>Biopsy, Large-Core Needle - adverse effects</subject><subject>Diagnostic Radiology</subject><subject>Diagnostic tests</subject><subject>Global Health</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image-Guided Biopsy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Interventional</subject><subject>Interventional Radiology</subject><subject>Lung - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lung cancer</subject><subject>Lung Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Neuroradiology</subject><subject>Pneumothorax</subject><subject>Pneumothorax - epidemiology</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><subject>Ultrasound</subject><issn>0938-7994</issn><issn>1432-1084</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1r3DAQhkVpSTYfP6CXYuglFyWjb6uHQlmSJhDoJTkLrT3eKNjWVrIL---jZZOQFgo5zWGeeTWjh5DPDM4ZgLnIAEIABaapFMrQ-gNZMCk4ZVDLj2QBVtTUWCsPyVHOjwBgmTQH5JCbQnBrF-R6GYdNHxo_hThWyU-Yq9hVyzu6nkOLbTUlP-bpISbfhKbq53FdrULc5O23asDJUz_6fptDPiGfOt9nPH2ux-T-6vJueU1vf_28Wf64pY3SdqJsBZ4rrTu9AuiaDo3QBkuxxgqNwmLLlEFUAgS2WgurpebKgwELKFAck-_73M28GrBtcCwb9m6TwuDT1kUf3N-dMTy4dfzjFOOmNqoEnD0HpPh7xjy5IeQG-96PGOfsWK3AaKu4fAfKta6ZrqGgX_9BH-Ocyt_sKCmVtMbsKLanmhRzTti97s3A7ZS6vVJXlLqdUleXmS9vD36deHFYAL4HcmmNa0xvnv5v6hPg6atl</recordid><startdate>20170101</startdate><enddate>20170101</enddate><creator>Heerink, W. J.</creator><creator>de Bock, G. H.</creator><creator>de Jonge, G. J.</creator><creator>Groen, H. J. M.</creator><creator>Vliegenthart, R.</creator><creator>Oudkerk, M.</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170101</creationdate><title>Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis</title><author>Heerink, W. J. ; de Bock, G. H. ; de Jonge, G. J. ; Groen, H. J. M. ; Vliegenthart, R. ; Oudkerk, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c569t-1b0a2566f6b00fcfe7367efe797936e39ed157ee5303ed663964625a07090e3e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Biopsy, Fine-Needle - adverse effects</topic><topic>Biopsy, Large-Core Needle - adverse effects</topic><topic>Diagnostic Radiology</topic><topic>Diagnostic tests</topic><topic>Global Health</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image-Guided Biopsy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Interventional</topic><topic>Interventional Radiology</topic><topic>Lung - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lung cancer</topic><topic>Lung Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Neuroradiology</topic><topic>Pneumothorax</topic><topic>Pneumothorax - epidemiology</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><topic>Ultrasound</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heerink, W. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Bock, G. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jonge, G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Groen, H. J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vliegenthart, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oudkerk, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heerink, W. J.</au><au>de Bock, G. H.</au><au>de Jonge, G. J.</au><au>Groen, H. J. M.</au><au>Vliegenthart, R.</au><au>Oudkerk, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>European radiology</jtitle><stitle>Eur Radiol</stitle><addtitle>Eur Radiol</addtitle><date>2017-01-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>138</spage><epage>148</epage><pages>138-148</pages><issn>0938-7994</issn><eissn>1432-1084</eissn><abstract>Objectives
To meta-analyze complication rate in computed tomography (CT)-guided transthoracic lung biopsy and associated risk factors.
Methods
Four databases were searched from 1/2000 to 8/2015 for studies reporting complications in CT-guided lung biopsy. Overall and major complication rates were pooled and compared between core biopsy and fine needle aspiration (FNA) using the random-effects model. Risk factors for complications in core biopsy and FNA were identified in meta-regression analysis.
Results
For core biopsy, 32 articles (8,133 procedures) were included and for FNA, 17 (4,620 procedures). Pooled overall complication rates for core biopsy and FNA were 38.8 % (95 % CI: 34.3–43.5 %) and 24.0 % (95 % CI: 18.2–30.8 %), respectively. Major complication rates were 5.7 % (95 % CI: 4.4–7.4 %) and 4.4 % (95 % CI: 2.7–7.0 %), respectively. Overall complication rate was higher for core biopsy compared to FNA (
p
< 0.001). For FNA, larger needle diameter was a risk factor for overall complications, and increased traversed lung parenchyma and smaller lesion size were risk factors for major complications. For core biopsy, no significant risk factors were identified.
Conclusions
In CT-guided lung biopsy, minor complications were common and occurred more often in core biopsy than FNA. Major complication rate was low. For FNA, smaller nodule diameter, larger needle diameter and increased traversed lung parenchyma were risk factors for complications.
Key Points
•
Minor complications are common in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
Major complication rate is low in CT-guided lung biopsy
•
CT-guided lung biopsy complications occur more often in core biopsy than FNA
•
Major complication rate is similar in core biopsy and FNA
•
Risk factors for FNA are larger needle diameter, smaller lesion size</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>27108299</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0938-7994 |
| ispartof | European radiology, 2017-01, Vol.27 (1), p.138-148 |
| issn | 0938-7994 1432-1084 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5127875 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Biopsy Biopsy, Fine-Needle - adverse effects Biopsy, Large-Core Needle - adverse effects Diagnostic Radiology Diagnostic tests Global Health Humans Image-Guided Biopsy - adverse effects Imaging Incidence Internal Medicine Interventional Interventional Radiology Lung - diagnostic imaging Lung cancer Lung Neoplasms - diagnosis Medical imaging Medical screening Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Neuroradiology Pneumothorax Pneumothorax - epidemiology Radiology Retrospective Studies Risk factors Tomography Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods Ultrasound |
| title | Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T16%3A13%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Complication%20rates%20of%20CT-guided%20transthoracic%20lung%20biopsy:%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=European%20radiology&rft.au=Heerink,%20W.%20J.&rft.date=2017-01-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=138&rft.epage=148&rft.pages=138-148&rft.issn=0938-7994&rft.eissn=1432-1084&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00330-016-4357-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1850769524%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1844549770&rft_id=info:pmid/27108299&rfr_iscdi=true |