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 *

193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33136181)

  • 1. Non-contrast MR angiography versus contrast enhanced MR angiography for detection of renal artery stenosis: a comparative analysis in 400 renal arteries.
    Lal H; Singh RKR; Yadav P; Yadav A; Bhadauria D; Singh A
    Abdom Radiol (NY); 2021 May; 46(5):2064-2071. PubMed ID: 33136181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Non-enhanced MR angiography of renal arteries: comparison with contrast-enhanced MR angiography.
    Angeretti MG; Lumia D; Canì A; Barresi M; Nocchi Cardim L; Piacentino F; Maresca AM; Novario R; Genovese EA; Fugazzola C
    Acta Radiol; 2013 Sep; 54(7):749-56. PubMed ID: 23550187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Non-contrast renal artery MRA using an inflow inversion recovery steady state free precession technique (Inhance): comparison with 3D contrast-enhanced MRA.
    Glockner JF; Takahashi N; Kawashima A; Woodrum DA; Stanley DW; Takei N; Miyoshi M; Sun W
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2010 Jun; 31(6):1411-8. PubMed ID: 20512894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Renal artery stenosis: comparative assessment by unenhanced renal artery MRA versus contrast-enhanced MRA.
    Khoo MM; Deeab D; Gedroyc WM; Duncan N; Taube D; Dick EA
    Eur Radiol; 2011 Jul; 21(7):1470-6. PubMed ID: 21337034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Non-contrast-enhanced MRA of renal artery stenosis: validation against DSA in a porcine model.
    Bley TA; François CJ; Schiebler ML; Wieben O; Takei N; Brittain JH; Del Rio AM; Grist TM; Reeder SB
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Feb; 26(2):547-55. PubMed ID: 26017736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Diagnosis of renal artery stenosis with magnetic resonance angiography and stenosis quantification].
    Marchand B; Hernandez-Hoyos M; Orkisz M; Douek P
    J Mal Vasc; 2000 Dec; 25(5):312-320. PubMed ID: 11148391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The capability of inflow inversion recovery magnetic resonance compared to contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance in renal artery angiography.
    Xu X; Lin X; Huang J; Pan Z; Zhu X; Chen K; Zee CS; Yan F
    Abdom Radiol (NY); 2017 Oct; 42(10):2479-2487. PubMed ID: 28470403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. High-resolution 3D unenhanced ECG-gated respiratory-navigated MR angiography of the renal arteries: comparison with contrast-enhanced MR angiography.
    Mohrs OK; Petersen SE; Schulze T; Zieschang M; Küx H; Schmitt P; Bergemann S; Kauczor HU
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Dec; 195(6):1423-8. PubMed ID: 21098205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. MR angiography at 3 Tesla to assess proximal internal carotid artery stenoses: contrast-enhanced or 3D time-of-flight MR angiography?
    Weber J; Veith P; Jung B; Ihorst G; Moske-Eick O; Meckel S; Urbach H; Taschner CA
    Clin Neuroradiol; 2015 Mar; 25(1):41-8. PubMed ID: 24384680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Non-contrast MR angiography using three-dimensional balanced steady-state free-precession imaging for evaluation of stenosis in the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery: a preliminary comparative study with computed tomography angiography.
    Cardia PP; Penachim TJ; Prando A; Torres US; D'Ippólito G
    Br J Radiol; 2017 Jul; 90(1075):20170011. PubMed ID: 28590771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of unenhanced magnetic resonance angiography for the assessment of renal artery stenosis.
    Sebastià C; Sotomayor AD; Paño B; Salvador R; Burrel M; Botey A; Nicolau C
    Eur J Radiol Open; 2016; 3():200-6. PubMed ID: 27536710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An international multicenter comparison of time-SLIP unenhanced MR angiography and contrast-enhanced CT angiography for assessing renal artery stenosis: the renal artery contrast-free trial.
    Albert TS; Akahane M; Parienty I; Yellin N; Catalá V; Alomar X; Prot A; Tomizawa N; Xue H; Katabathina VS; Lopera JE; Jin Z
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Jan; 204(1):182-8. PubMed ID: 25539255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Performance of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Detecting Renal Artery Stenosis as Compared With Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography Using Conventional Angiography as a Reference.
    Liang KW; Chen JW; Huang HH; Su CH; Tyan YS; Tsao TF
    J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2017; 41(4):619-627. PubMed ID: 28099225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Renal artery assessment with nonenhanced steady-state free precession versus contrast-enhanced MR angiography.
    Wyttenbach R; Braghetti A; Wyss M; Alerci M; Briner L; Santini P; Cozzi L; Di Valentino M; Katoh M; Marone C; Vock P; Gallino A
    Radiology; 2007 Oct; 245(1):186-95. PubMed ID: 17717326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Steady-state free precession MRA of the renal arteries: breath-hold and navigator-gated techniques vs. CE-MRA.
    Maki JH; Wilson GJ; Eubank WB; Glickerman DJ; Pipavath S; Hoogeveen RM
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2007 Oct; 26(4):966-73. PubMed ID: 17896351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Noncontrast-enhanced magnetic resonance renal angiography using a repetitive artery and venous labelling technique at 3 T: comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in subjects with normal renal function.
    Park SY; Kim CK; Kim E; Park BK
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Feb; 25(2):533-40. PubMed ID: 25216769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Noncontrast MR angiography for comprehensive assessment of abdominopelvic arteries using quadruple inversion-recovery preconditioning and 3D balanced steady-state free precession imaging.
    Atanasova IP; Kim D; Lim RP; Storey P; Kim S; Guo H; Lee VS
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2011 Jun; 33(6):1430-9. PubMed ID: 21591013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Image Quality and Stenosis Assessment of Non-Contrast-Enhanced 3-T Magnetic Resonance Angiography in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease Compared with Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Digital Subtraction Angiography.
    Liu J; Zhang N; Fan Z; Luo N; Zhao Y; Bi X; An J; Chen Z; Liu D; Wen Z; Fan Z; Li D
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(11):e0166467. PubMed ID: 27861626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Renal artery stenosis evaluation: diagnostic performance of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR angiography--comparison with DSA.
    Soulez G; Pasowicz M; Benea G; Grazioli L; Niedmann JP; Konopka M; Douek PC; Morana G; Schaefer FK; Vanzulli A; Bluemke DA; Maki JH; Prince MR; Schneider G; Ballarati C; Coulden R; Wasser MN; McCauley TR; Kirchin MA; Pirovano G
    Radiology; 2008 Apr; 247(1):273-85. PubMed ID: 18372471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Role of non-contrast balanced steady-state free precession megnetic resonance angiography compared to contrast-enhanced megnetic resonance angiography in diagnosing renal artery stenosis: a meta-analysis.
    Tao W; Shen Y; Guo L; Bo G
    Chin Med J (Engl); 2014; 127(19):3483-90. PubMed ID: 25269918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.