Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:10225158rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0027136lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10225158lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1704775lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10225158lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C2603343lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10225158lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0023981lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:issue2lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:dateCreated1999-9-7lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:abstractTextSeventy-three surgeons participated in a prospective audit of myringoplasty. They returned data on 1070 individual patients. Up to 12 months follow-up information was obtained. The mean number of myringoplasties performed per consultant in 1 year (1995) was 14.7 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 12.1 17.2). The main indication for performing the operation was to achieve an intact tympanic membrane. The mean graft take rate was 82.2%. When hearing improvement was the main indication for surgery it was improved in 67%. The use, or not, of an antibiotic had no significant influence on the graft take rate or the complication rate. Most complications reported were minor in nature.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:monthAprlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:issn0307-7772lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:authorpubmed-author:FowlerSSlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KotechaBBlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TophamJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:volume24lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:pagination126-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:dateRevised2005-5-2lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:10225158...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:year1999lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:articleTitleMyringoplasty: a prospective audit study.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:affiliationComparative Audit Service, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:10225158pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:10225158lld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:10225158lld:pubmed