76 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2568777)
1. Iopromide dosage and urographic image quality: is there an optimal dose?
Dominik R; Keysser R; Taenzer V
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():111-5. PubMed ID: 2568777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Urography with monomeric and dimeric nonionic contrast media: comparative, randomized, double-blind study of iotrolan 280 and iopromide 300.
Taenzer V; Wenzel-Hora BI
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():116-8. PubMed ID: 2568778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improved visualization of the urinary tract in multidetector CT urography (MDCTU): analysis of individual acquisition delay and opacification using furosemide and low-dose test images.
Kemper J; Regier M; Stork A; Adam G; Nolte-Ernsting C
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2006; 30(5):751-7. PubMed ID: 16954923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of contrast media osmolality on intravenous urographic quality.
Lovett I; Benn I; Benness G; Doust B
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():105-7. PubMed ID: 2568775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical experience with iohexol versus iopromide in excretory urography.
Bischoff W
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():108-10. PubMed ID: 2568776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Iohexol does not influence the levels of blood serum cation electrolytes during intravenous pyelography.
Kokkas B; Mironidou M; Katsimba D; Kaitatzis C; Karamanos G; Christopoulos S
Radiol Med; 2001 Jun; 101(6):485-7. PubMed ID: 11479446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Experimental urography in dogs: diagnostic quality and pharmacokinetic behavior of iotrolan in comparison to nonionic and ionic, monomeric contrast media.
Nauert C; Mützel W
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():82-7. PubMed ID: 2568814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Modification of the image quality of i.v. DSA by the iodine concentration of the contrast medium].
Langer M; Felix R; Keysser R; Speck U; Banzer D
Digitale Bilddiagn; 1985 Sep; 5(3):154-9. PubMed ID: 3902326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Iohexol and ioxithalamate for intravenous urography. A comparative parallel study.
Egeblad M; Nielsen NT; Fries J; Laulund S
Eur J Radiol; 1985 Aug; 5(3):240-2. PubMed ID: 3896801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Urography with non-ionic contrast media: II. Diagnostic quality and tolerance of iopromide in comparison with ioxaglate.
Taenzer V; Meiisel P; Hartwig P
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1983; 118():153-5. PubMed ID: 6139071
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Urinary protein excretion following intravenously administered ionic and non-ionic contrast media in man.
Skovgaard N; Holm J; Hemmingsen L; Skaarup P
Acta Radiol; 1989; 30(5):517-9. PubMed ID: 2692667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Iohexol vs. diatrizoate. A comparative study in intravenous urography.
Rankin RN; Eng FW
Invest Radiol; 1985; 20(1 Suppl):S112-4. PubMed ID: 3972525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Elimination of the nonionic contrast medium iopromide in end-stage renal failure by hemodialysis.
Kierdorf H; Kindler J; Winterscheid R; Hollmann HJ; Vorwerk D; Speck U
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():119-23. PubMed ID: 2568779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Non-ionic iodinated dimeric versus monomeric X-ray contrast media: effects on complement factors in vivo].
Böhm I; Speck U; Schild H
Rofo; 2006 Mar; 178(3):306-12. PubMed ID: 16508838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Excretory urography: comparison of the ionic contrast medium amidotrezoic acid with the non-ionic contrast medium iohexol].
Grabenwöger F; Dock W; Pinterits F; Metz V
Wien Med Wochenschr; 1989 Feb; 139(3):48-50. PubMed ID: 2650470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Renal and hepatic tolerance of nonionic and ionic contrast media in intravenous digital subtraction angiography.
Langer M; Junge W; Keysser R; Hasford J; Jänicke UA
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():95-100. PubMed ID: 2568817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A randomised, double-blind trial of iomeprol and iopromide in intravenous excretory urography.
Harding JR; Bertazzoli M; Spinazzi A
Eur J Radiol; 1994 May; 18 Suppl 1():S93-6. PubMed ID: 8020526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Are nonionic contrast media identical in their tolerability? Results of a double-blind randomized multicenter study with iomeprol and iopromide].
Schmiedel E
Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 Jul; 7(4):183-8. PubMed ID: 9340014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Pharmacokinetics of iohexol, iopamidol, iopromide, and iosimide compared with meglumine diatrizoate.
Hartwig P; Mützel W; Taenzer V
Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():220-3. PubMed ID: 2568800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prevalence of acute reactions to iopromide: postmarketing surveillance study of 74,717 patients.
Kopp AF; Mortele KJ; Cho YD; Palkowitsch P; Bettmann MA; Claussen CD
Acta Radiol; 2008 Oct; 49(8):902-11. PubMed ID: 18651252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
