149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38817410)
1. A review of ultrasound contrast media.
Oglat AA
F1000Res; 2023; 12():1444. PubMed ID: 38817410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Three Decades of Ultrasound Contrast Agents: A Review of the Past, Present and Future Improvements.
Frinking P; Segers T; Luan Y; Tranquart F
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2020 Apr; 46(4):892-908. PubMed ID: 31941587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Milestone: Approval of CEUS for Diagnostic Liver Imaging in Adults and Children in the USA.
Seitz K; Strobel D
Ultraschall Med; 2016 Jun; 37(3):229-32. PubMed ID: 27276056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Italian Society of Cardiovascular Echography (SIEC) Consensus Conference on the state of the art of contrast echocardiography.
Ital Heart J; 2004 Apr; 5(4):309-34. PubMed ID: 15185894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Characteristics and Echogenicity of Clinical Ultrasound Contrast Agents: An In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison Study.
Hyvelin JM; Gaud E; Costa M; Helbert A; Bussat P; Bettinger T; Frinking P
J Ultrasound Med; 2017 May; 36(5):941-953. PubMed ID: 28240842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Monodisperse versus Polydisperse Ultrasound Contrast Agents: In Vivo Sensitivity and safety in Rat and Pig.
Helbert A; Gaud E; Segers T; Botteron C; Frinking P; Jeannot V
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2020 Dec; 46(12):3339-3352. PubMed ID: 33008649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Ultrasound contrast agents: basic principles.
Calliada F; Campani R; Bottinelli O; Bozzini A; Sommaruga MG
Eur J Radiol; 1998 May; 27 Suppl 2():S157-60. PubMed ID: 9652516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue® (sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles) compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the characterisation of focal liver lesions and detection of liver metastases: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Westwood M; Joore M; Grutters J; Redekop K; Armstrong N; Lee K; Gloy V; Raatz H; Misso K; Severens J; Kleijnen J
Health Technol Assess; 2013 Apr; 17(16):1-243. PubMed ID: 23611316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography: in vitro evaluation of a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent for in vivo optimization.
Back SJ; Edgar JC; Canning DA; Darge K
Pediatr Radiol; 2015 Sep; 45(10):1496-505. PubMed ID: 25930084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surface Charge Measurement of SonoVue, Definity and Optison: A Comparison of Laser Doppler Electrophoresis and Micro-Electrophoresis.
Ja'afar F; Leow CH; Garbin V; Sennoga CA; Tang MX; Seddon JM
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2015 Nov; 41(11):2990-3000. PubMed ID: 26318559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Update on the safety and efficacy of commercial ultrasound contrast agents in cardiac applications.
Appis AW; Tracy MJ; Feinstein SB
Echo Res Pract; 2015 Jun; 2(2):R55-62. PubMed ID: 26693339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Rest-Stress Limb Perfusion Imaging in Humans with Contrast Ultrasound Using Intermediate-Power Imaging and Microbubbles Resistant to Inertial Cavitation.
Davidson BP; Hodovan J; Belcik JT; Moccetti F; Xie A; Ammi AY; Lindner JR
J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2017 May; 30(5):503-510.e1. PubMed ID: 28238588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Ultrasound contrast agents: a review.
Goldberg BB; Liu JB; Forsberg F
Ultrasound Med Biol; 1994; 20(4):319-33. PubMed ID: 8085289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. In vitro acoustic characterisation of four intravenous ultrasonic contrast agents at 30 MHz.
Moran CM; Watson RJ; Fox KA; McDicken WN
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2002 Jun; 28(6):785-91. PubMed ID: 12113791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A review of nonconventional ultrasound techniques and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of noncardiac canine disorders.
Szatmári V; Harkányi Z; Vörös K
Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2003; 44(4):380-91. PubMed ID: 12939054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Microbubble stability is a major determinant of the efficiency of ultrasound and microbubble mediated in vivo gene transfer.
Alter J; Sennoga CA; Lopes DM; Eckersley RJ; Wells DJ
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2009 Jun; 35(6):976-84. PubMed ID: 19285783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Quantification of microbubble destruction of three fluorocarbon-filled ultrasonic contrast agents.
Moran CM; Anderson T; Pye SD; Sboros V; McDicken WN
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2000 May; 26(4):629-39. PubMed ID: 10856626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Experimental acoustic characterization of an endoskeletal antibubble contrast agent: First results.
Panfilova A; Chen P; van Sloun RJG; Wijkstra H; Postema M; Poortinga AT; Mischi M
Med Phys; 2021 Nov; 48(11):6765-6780. PubMed ID: 34580883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Use of ultrasound pulses combined with Definity for targeted blood-brain barrier disruption: a feasibility study.
McDannold N; Vykhodtseva N; Hynynen K
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2007 Apr; 33(4):584-90. PubMed ID: 17337109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Ultrasound Contrast: Gas Microbubbles in the Vasculature.
Klibanov AL
Invest Radiol; 2021 Jan; 56(1):50-61. PubMed ID: 33181574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
