203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1828529)
1. The safety and cost-effectiveness of low osmolar contrast media. Can economic analysis determine the real worth of a new technology?
Henry DA; Evans DB; Robertson J
Med J Aust; 1991 Jun; 154(11):766-72. PubMed ID: 1828529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Intravenous contrast media: use and associated mortality.
Cashman JD; McCredie J; Henry DA
Med J Aust; 1991 Nov; 155(9):618-23. PubMed ID: 1943961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative cytotoxicity of high-osmolar and low-osmolar contrast media on HKCs in vitro.
Duan S; Zhou X; Liu F; Peng Y; Chen Y; Pei Y; Ling G; Zhou L; Li Y; Pi Y; Tang K; Liu R; Li G
J Nephrol; 2006; 19(6):717-24. PubMed ID: 17173243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Low osmolar (non-ionic) contrast media versus high osmolar (ionic) contrast media in intravenous urography and enhanced computerized tomography: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Wangsuphachart S
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health; 1991 Dec; 22(4):664-76. PubMed ID: 1820658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Decision analysis to assess cost-effectiveness of low-osmolality contrast medium for intravenous urography.
Calvo MV; Pilar del Val M; Mar Alvarez M; Domínguez-Gil A
Am J Hosp Pharm; 1992 Mar; 49(3):577-84. PubMed ID: 1598930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Contrast media and nephropathy: findings from systematic analysis and Food and Drug Administration reports of adverse effects.
Solomon R; Dumouchel W
Invest Radiol; 2006 Aug; 41(8):651-60. PubMed ID: 16829749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prophylactic Oophorectomy: Reducing the U.S. Death Rate from Epithelial Ovarian Cancer. A Continuing Debate.
Piver MS
Oncologist; 1996; 1(5):326-330. PubMed ID: 10388011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The risks of death and of severe nonfatal reactions with high- vs low-osmolality contrast media: a meta-analysis.
Caro JJ; Trindade E; McGregor M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Apr; 156(4):825-32. PubMed ID: 1825900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution on respiratory and cardiovascular mortality in the Netherlands: the NLCS-AIR study.
Brunekreef B; Beelen R; Hoek G; Schouten L; Bausch-Goldbohm S; Fischer P; Armstrong B; Hughes E; Jerrett M; van den Brandt P
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2009 Mar; (139):5-71; discussion 73-89. PubMed ID: 19554969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The cost-effectiveness of replacing high-osmolality with low-osmolality contrast media.
Caro JJ; Trindade E; McGregor M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1992 Oct; 159(4):869-74. PubMed ID: 1529856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Meta-analysis of the Italian studies on short-term effects of air pollution].
Biggeri A; Bellini P; Terracini B;
Epidemiol Prev; 2001; 25(2 Suppl):1-71. PubMed ID: 11515188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Radiographic contrast media: an introduction to its use, adverse-effect profile, and economic impact.
Gersema LM
J Pharm Technol; 1993; 9(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 10123761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Safety and cost effectiveness of high-osmolality as compared with low-osmolality contrast material in patients undergoing cardiac angiography.
Steinberg EP; Moore RD; Powe NR; Gopalan R; Davidoff AJ; Litt M; Graziano S; Brinker JA
N Engl J Med; 1992 Feb; 326(7):425-30. PubMed ID: 1732769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Tuberculosis in compromised hosts].
Kekkaku; 2003 Nov; 78(11):717-22. PubMed ID: 14672050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of nonionic, low-osmolality radiocontrast agents with ionic, high-osmolality agents during cardiac catheterization.
Barrett BJ; Parfrey PS; Vavasour HM; O'Dea F; Kent G; Stone E
N Engl J Med; 1992 Feb; 326(7):431-6. PubMed ID: 1732770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Adverse events and cost savings three years after implementation of guidelines for outpatient contrast-agent use.
Grant KL; Camamo JM
Am J Health Syst Pharm; 1997 Jun; 54(12):1395-401. PubMed ID: 9194983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative tolerability of contrast media used for coronary interventions.
Esplugas E; Cequier A; Gomez-Hospital JA; Del Blanco BG; Jara F
Drug Saf; 2002; 25(15):1079-98. PubMed ID: 12452733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Preston M. Hickey memorial lecture. Ionic and nonionic iodinated contrast media: evolution and strategies for use.
McClennan BL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1990 Aug; 155(2):225-33. PubMed ID: 2115244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Selective use of low-osmolality contrast media in computed tomography.
Valls C; Andía E; Sánchez A; Moreno V
Eur Radiol; 2003 Aug; 13(8):2000-5. PubMed ID: 12942301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Adverse reactions to contrast media: factors that determine the cost of treatment.
Powe NR; Moore RD; Steinberg EP
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Nov; 161(5):1089-95. PubMed ID: 8273616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
