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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

292 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1739017)

  • 41. Contrast-enhanced CT of the liver and spleen: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents.
    Nelson RC; Chezmar JL; Peterson JE; Bernardino ME
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Nov; 153(5):973-6. PubMed ID: 2801447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. High dose brain CT with ioxaglate and diatrizoate adverse reactions and effects on urine protein tests.
    Raininko R; Laivola J; Irjala K
    Eur J Radiol; 1988 Feb; 8(1):44-6. PubMed ID: 3281838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Comparison of omnipaque with hypaque in temporomandibular arthrography.
    Kaplan PA; Lieberman RP; Chu WK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Dec; 153(6):1225-7. PubMed ID: 2816636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Iohexol versus meglumine-Ca-metrizoate in cerebral angiography. A randomized double-blind cross-over study.
    Lovrencić M; Jakovac I; Klanfar Z
    Acta Radiol Suppl; 1986; 369():521-3. PubMed ID: 2980546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Comparison of meglumine sodium diatrizoate, iopamidol, and iohexol for coronary angiography and ventriculography.
    Murdock CJ; Davis MJ; Ireland MA; Gibbons FA; Cope GD
    Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn; 1990 Mar; 19(3):179-83. PubMed ID: 2180577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Hepatic dynamic sequential CT: section enhancement profiles with a bolus of ionic and nonionic contrast agents.
    Nelson RC; Moyers JH; Chezmar JL; Hoel MJ; Jones EC; Peterson JE; Cork RD; Bernardino ME
    Radiology; 1991 Feb; 178(2):499-502. PubMed ID: 1987614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Iobitridol 300 compared to iopromide 300--a double-blind randomized phase-III study of clinical tolerance in total body CT.
    Hoogewoud HM; Woessmer B
    Acta Radiol Suppl; 1996; 400():62-4. PubMed ID: 8619354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Contrast bolus dynamic computed tomography for the measurement of solid organ perfusion.
    Blomley MJ; Coulden R; Bufkin C; Lipton MJ; Dawson P
    Invest Radiol; 1993 Nov; 28 Suppl 5():S72-7; discussion S78. PubMed ID: 8282508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. A prospective trial of ionic vs nonionic contrast agents in routine clinical practice: comparison of adverse effects.
    Wolf GL; Arenson RL; Cross AP
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 May; 152(5):939-44. PubMed ID: 2495706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Contrast enhancement of the liver and blood. Nonionic versus ionic contrast media in the pig.
    Jensen LI; Golman K; Nyman U; Dean PB
    Invest Radiol; 1985 Dec; 20(9):989-94. PubMed ID: 4077451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Iohexol compared to urografin meglumine in cerebral angiography. A randomized, double blind cross-over study.
    Ahlgren P
    Neuroradiology; 1982; 23(4):195-8. PubMed ID: 7121808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Comparison of double-contrast CT arthrography image quality with nonionic contrast agents: isotonic dimeric iodixanol 270 mg I/mL and monomeric iohexol 300 mg I/mL.
    Blum AG; Simon JM; Cotten A; Quirin-Cosmidis I; Boyer B; Boutry N; Antonini JP
    Invest Radiol; 2000 May; 35(5):304-10. PubMed ID: 10803671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Contrast media for CT. An analysis of the early pharmacokinetics.
    Jensen LI; Dean PB; Nyman U; Golman K
    Invest Radiol; 1985 Nov; 20(8):867-70. PubMed ID: 4077440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. High- and low-osmolar contrast agents in urography: a comparison of the appearances with respect to pyelotubular opacification and renal length.
    Whitehouse RW
    Clin Radiol; 1986 Jul; 37(4):395-8. PubMed ID: 3731706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Omnipaque and Gastrografin in gastrointestinal follow-through examinations.
    Kinnunen J; Ahovuo J; Edgren J; Pietilä J; Laasonen L; Linden H; Tierala E
    Rontgenblatter; 1989 May; 42(5):228-31. PubMed ID: 2756308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Contrast agent nephrotoxicity: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents.
    Stacul F; Carraro M; Magnaldi S; Faccini L; Guarnieri G; Dalla Palma L
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987 Dec; 149(6):1287-9. PubMed ID: 2891285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. A randomized comparison of iodixanol and iohexol in adult body computed tomography scanning.
    Lee FT; Caroline DF; Thornbury JR; Gembala RB; Kelcz F; Pozniak MA; Rima JB; Sargent BE
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Sep; 3 Suppl 3():S500-6. PubMed ID: 8883528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Iopamidol as an oral contrast media for computed tomography: a taste comparison to iohexol, diatrizoate sodium, and barium sulfate.
    Rogers D; Sheth C; Eisenmenger L; Mignogna E; Winter T
    Abdom Radiol (NY); 2017 Dec; 42(12):2822-2826. PubMed ID: 28669111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Oral contrast agents in CT of the abdomen.
    Garrett PR; Meshkov SL; Perlmutter GS
    Radiology; 1984 Nov; 153(2):545-6. PubMed ID: 6484186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Contrast medium precipitation during abdominal CT.
    Ball DS; Radecki PD; Friedman AC; Caroline DF; Mayer DP
    Radiology; 1986 Jan; 158(1):258-60. PubMed ID: 3940390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.