勘误：腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者使用限制性剂量晶体液是安全且具成本效益的：前瞻性双臂平行随机对照试验[勘误]
Erratum: A restrictive dose of crystalloids in patients during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and cost-effective: prospective, two-arm parallel, randomized controlled trial [Corrigendum].
出版信息
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018 Jun 26;14:1155. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S177217. eCollection 2018.
Abstract
[This corrects the article on p. 741 in vol. 14, PMID: 29719401.].
摘要
[这更正了第14卷第741页的文章，PMID: 29719401。]
相似文献
1
Erratum: A restrictive dose of crystalloids in patients during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and cost-effective: prospective, two-arm parallel, randomized controlled trial [Corrigendum].勘误：腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者使用限制性剂量晶体液是安全且具成本效益的：前瞻性双臂平行随机对照试验[勘误]
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018 Jun 26;14:1155. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S177217. eCollection 2018.
2
A restrictive dose of crystalloids in patients during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and cost-effective: prospective, two-arm parallel, randomized controlled trial.腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者使用限制性剂量晶体液是安全且具有成本效益的：前瞻性双臂平行随机对照试验。
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018 Apr 19;14:741-751. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S160778. eCollection 2018.
3
Corrigendum.勘误
Paediatr Child Health. 2015 Nov-Dec;20(8):466-7. doi: 10.1093/pch/20.8.466.
4
ERRATUM.勘误
Int J Bioprint. 2020 Sep 17;6(4):309. doi: 10.18063/ijb.v6i4.309. eCollection 2020.
5
A randomized controlled trial to compare a restrictive strategy to usual care for the effectiveness of cholecystectomy in patients with symptomatic gallstones (SECURE trial protocol).一项比较限制性策略与常规治疗对有症状胆结石患者胆囊切除术有效性的随机对照试验（SECURE试验方案）。
BMC Surg. 2016 Jul 13;16(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12893-016-0160-3.
6
CORRIGENDUM: Correction of the affiliation name. Comparison of the outcomes of robotic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.勘误：机构名称更正。机器人胆囊切除术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术的疗效比较。
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2017 Oct;93(4):229. doi: 10.4174/astr.2017.93.4.229. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
7
Erratum: Ocular comfort assessment of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5.0% in OPUS-3, a Phase III randomized controlled trial [Corrigendum].勘误：在一项III期随机对照试验OPUS-3中对5.0%的lifitegrast眼用溶液进行的眼部舒适度评估[勘误]
Clin Ophthalmol. 2018 May 17;12:913. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S168970. eCollection 2018.
8
Erratum: An intervention designed to improve sensory impairments in the elderly and indoor lighting in their homes: an exploratory randomized controlled trial [Corrigendum].勘误：一项旨在改善老年人感觉障碍及居家室内照明的干预措施：一项探索性随机对照试验[勘误]
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2015 Jul 8;8:321. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S85593. eCollection 2015.
9
Erratum: Comparison of the acute-phase response after laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery: a substudy of a randomized controlled trial [Erratum].勘误：腹腔镜与开放主动脉双股动脉搭桥手术后急性期反应的比较：一项随机对照试验的子研究[勘误]
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2017 Jun 19;13:215. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S138804. eCollection 2017.
10
Erratum: Morning and evening efficacy evaluation of rupatadine (10 and 20 mg), compared with cetirizine 10 mg in perennial allergic rhinitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial [Corrigendum].勘误：在常年性变应性鼻炎中比较卢帕他定（10毫克和20毫克）与西替利嗪10毫克的早晚疗效评估：一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验[勘误]
J Asthma Allergy. 2015 Dec 17;8:135-7. doi: 10.2147/JAA.S100411. eCollection 2015.
Zotero 插件