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.
108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3798263)
21. Difficulties of risk determination from the use of new contrast media. Vogel H; Ludwig A Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmed Erganzungsbd; 1989; 128():2-5. PubMed ID: 2568794 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Low-osmolality contrast media: a current perspective. King BF; Hartman GW; Williamson B; LeRoy AJ; Hattery RR Mayo Clin Proc; 1989 Aug; 64(8):976-85. PubMed ID: 2677533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The non-ionic dimers: a new class of contrast agents. Dawson P; Howell M Br J Radiol; 1986 Oct; 59(706):987-91. PubMed ID: 3768640 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Iodinated contrast media and the kidney. Weisbord SD Rev Cardiovasc Med; 2008; 9 Suppl 1():S14-23. PubMed ID: 18418313 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The clotting issue: etiologic factors in thromboembolism. I. Chemistry, pharmacology, and toxicity of angiographic contrast agents. Dawson P Invest Radiol; 1993 Nov; 28 Suppl 5():S25-30. PubMed ID: 8282499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Advantages of non-ionic contrast media in vascular applications. Malott JC; Fodor J Radiol Technol; 1984; 56(2):95-8. PubMed ID: 6390518 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Variable effects of radiological contrast media on thrombus growth in a rabbit jugular vein thrombosis model. Levi M; Biemond BJ; Sturk A; Hoek J; ten Cate JW Thromb Haemost; 1991 Aug; 66(2):218-21. PubMed ID: 1771615 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Trial of low versus high osmolar contrast media in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Banerjee AK; Grainger SL; Thompson RP Br J Clin Pract; 1990 Nov; 44(11):445-7. PubMed ID: 2282293 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Low-osmolar contrast media in the 1990s. Guidelines for urography in a cost-sensitive environment. Gavant ML Invest Radiol; 1993 Nov; 28 Suppl 5():S13-9; discussion S20. PubMed ID: 8282497 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Radiographic contrast media, function and future reassessed. Sovak M Int J Rad Appl Instrum B; 1988; 15(1):3-7. PubMed ID: 3350693 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
34. For patients with renal insufficiency, do low-osmolar iodinated contrast agents lessen the risk of nephrotoxicity, compared with high-osmolar agents? Hopper KD AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Jun; 168(6):1615. PubMed ID: 9168738 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. A case study of the decision in Denmark to restrict use of high-osmolar contrast media in intravascular radiographic procedures. Thomsen HS; Archer JW; Schiermer L; Radensky PW Acad Radiol; 1997 Jun; 4(6):446-50. PubMed ID: 9189203 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. The promise of low osmolar contrast media: new data in cardiac angiography. Radensky P J Cardiovasc Manag; 1993; 4(1):23-7. PubMed ID: 10126705 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Low osmolar and non-ionic X-ray contrast media and cortical blindness. Kermode AG; Chakera T; Mastaglia FL Clin Exp Neurol; 1992; 29():272-6. PubMed ID: 1343869 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The safety and cost-effectiveness of low osmolar contrast media. Proudfoot AD Med J Aust; 1991 Jul; 155(2):136. PubMed ID: 1906974 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]