These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
5. Optimization of the size distribution and myocardial contrast effect of perfluorocarbon-filled albumin microbubbles by lyophilization under continuous negative pressure. Chen S; Wang Z; Zhou YT; Grayburn PA J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2000 Aug; 13(8):748-53. PubMed ID: 10936818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A Comparative Study of Commercially Available Ultrasound Contrast Agents for Sub-harmonic-Aided Pressure Estimation (SHAPE) in a Bladder Phantom. Kalayeh K; Fowlkes JB; Yeras S; Chen A; Daignault-Newton S; Schultz WW; Sack BS Ultrasound Med Biol; 2024 Oct; 50(10):1494-1505. PubMed ID: 39054243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. On the usefulness of the mechanical index displayed on clinical ultrasound scanners for predicting contrast microbubble destruction. Forsberg F; Shi WT; Merritt CR; Dai Q; Solcova M; Goldberg BB J Ultrasound Med; 2005 Apr; 24(4):443-50. PubMed ID: 15784762 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Preliminary clinical experience in cardiology with sonazoid. Marelli C Am J Cardiol; 2000 Aug; 86(4A):10G-13G. PubMed ID: 10997345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Italian Society of Cardiovascular Echography (SIEC) Consensus Conference on the state of the art of contrast echocardiography. Ital Heart J; 2004 Apr; 5(4):309-34. PubMed ID: 15185894 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Differences in definity and optison microbubble destruction rates at a similar mechanical index with different real-time perfusion systems. Sonne C; Xie F; Lof J; Oberdorfer J; Phillips P; Carr Everbach E; Porter TR J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2003 Nov; 16(11):1178-85. PubMed ID: 14608290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A New Method to Quantify Concentration of Microbubbles in Attenuating Media Using Bubble Destruction Curve Analysis of the Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound. Kamiyama N; Wakui N; Oguri T; Hashimoto H; Kanayama Y; Nagai H Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Sep; 45(9):2485-2492. PubMed ID: 31239150 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of ultrasound contrast agents on Doppler tissue velocity estimation. Ressner M; Brodin LA; Jansson T; Hoff L; Ask P; Janerot-Sjoberg B J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2006 Feb; 19(2):154-64. PubMed ID: 16455419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In vivo study of microbubbles as an MR susceptibility contrast agent. Wong KK; Huang I; Kim YR; Tang H; Yang ES; Kwong KK; Wu EX Magn Reson Med; 2004 Sep; 52(3):445-52. PubMed ID: 15334560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. On the effect of lung filtering and cardiac pressure on the standard properties of ultrasound contrast agent. Bouakaz A; de Jong N; Cachard C; Jouini K Ultrasonics; 1998 Feb; 36(1-5):703-8. PubMed ID: 9651600 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Interactions between microbubbles and ultrasound: in vitro and in vivo observations. Wei K; Skyba DM; Firschke C; Jayaweera AR; Lindner JR; Kaul S J Am Coll Cardiol; 1997 Apr; 29(5):1081-8. PubMed ID: 9120163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cavitation threshold of microbubbles in gel tunnels by focused ultrasound. Sassaroli E; Hynynen K Ultrasound Med Biol; 2007 Oct; 33(10):1651-60. PubMed ID: 17590501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The behaviour of individual contrast agent microbubbles. Sboros V; Moran CM; Pye SD; McDicken WN Ultrasound Med Biol; 2003 May; 29(5):687-94. PubMed ID: 12754068 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]