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 *

86 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3907933)

  • 1. The use of a low-osmolality contrast medium in hysterosalpingography: comparison with a conventional contrast medium.
    Davies AC; Keightley A; Borthwick-Clarke A; Walters HL
    Clin Radiol; 1985 Sep; 36(5):533-6. PubMed ID: 3907933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Hexabrix as a contrast agent for hysterosalpingography.
    Winfield AC; Maxson WS; Harding DR; Diggs J; Wentz AC
    Radiology; 1984 Jul; 152(1):232-3. PubMed ID: 6729127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Hexabrix--a new contrast medium in angiocardiography.
    Cumberland DC
    Br Heart J; 1981 Jun; 45(6):698-702. PubMed ID: 7020727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Urography with a low osmolality contrast agent. Comparison of Hexabrix with Conray 325.
    McClennan BL; Ling D; Rholl KS; James M
    Invest Radiol; 1986 Feb; 21(2):144-50. PubMed ID: 3957588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparative study: Endografine (diatrizoate), Vasurix polyvidone (acetrizoate), Dimer-X (iocarmate) and Hexabrix (ioxaglate) in hysterosalpingography.
    Schütte HE
    Diagn Imaging; 1982; 51(6):277-83. PubMed ID: 7173007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison between iotrolan, a non-ionic dimer, and a hyperosmolar contrast medium, Urografin, in hysterosalpingography.
    Brokensha C; Whitehouse G
    Br J Radiol; 1991 Jul; 64(763):587-90. PubMed ID: 1873659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Comparison between isteropac and a new non-ionic contrast medium for hysterosalpingography (B-15000)].
    Valentini AL; De Vivo D; Danza FM; La Vecchia G; Vincenzoni M
    Radiol Med; 1986 May; 72(5):308-10. PubMed ID: 3520708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bronchospasm following intravenous injection of ionic and non-ionic low-osmolality contrast media.
    Longstaff AJ; Henson JH
    Clin Radiol; 1985 Nov; 36(6):651-3. PubMed ID: 3905203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of Hexabrix 320 and Conray 420 for left ventriculography in patients with coronary artery disease.
    Lyons J; Brooks N; Cattell M; Isolani-Smyth E; Balcon R
    Br J Radiol; 1984 Mar; 57(675):209-11. PubMed ID: 6365233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison between two radiographic contrast media for hysterosalpingography.
    Ekelund L; Karp W
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1981; 60(4):393-4. PubMed ID: 7282305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A clinical trial of a new low osmolality contrast medium. Sodium and meglumine ioxaglate (Hexabrix) compared with meglumine iothalamate (Conray) for carotid arteriography.
    Grainger RG
    Br J Radiol; 1979 Oct; 52(622):781-6. PubMed ID: 389336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [A comparison of the occurrence of side-effects of ioxaglinic acid (Hexabrix) and metrizoate (Isopaque Amin) in hysterosalpingography. A randomized prospective study].
    Lauridsen KN
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1986 May; 148(19):1141-3. PubMed ID: 3523907
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Contrast agent-induced thrombophlebitis following leg phlebography: meglumine loxaglate versus meglumine lothalamate.
    Thomas ML; Briggs GM; Kuan BB
    Radiology; 1983 May; 147(2):399-400. PubMed ID: 6340158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pain in peripheral arteriography-a comparison of a low osmolality contrast medium with a conventional compound.
    Tillmann U; Adler R; Fuchs WA
    Br J Radiol; 1979 Feb; 52(614):102-4. PubMed ID: 371733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Comparison of diagnostic quality in hysterosalpingography between iodinated non-ionic contrast media with low and high osmolarity].
    Piccotti K; Guida D; Carbonetti F; Stefanetti L; Macioce A; Cremona A; David V
    Clin Ter; 2015; 166(2):e91-7. PubMed ID: 25945450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The optimal concentration of contrast medium for aortography and femoral arteriography: a comparison of Hexabrix 320 and Hexabrix 250.
    Grainger RG
    Clin Radiol; 1986 May; 37(3):281-4. PubMed ID: 3519053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pain in peripheral arteriography: an assessment of conventional versus ionic and non-ionic low-osmolality contrast agents.
    Murphy G; Campbell DR; Fraser DB
    Can Assoc Radiol J; 1988 Jun; 39(2):103-6. PubMed ID: 2967829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Low dose low osmolar intravenous urography.
    Eyes BE; Goldman M; Nixon TE; Scally J; Brown A
    Clin Radiol; 1987 Jul; 38(4):403-5. PubMed ID: 3304790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Advantages of nonionic contrast agents in adult urography.
    Dray RJ; Winfield AC; Muhletaler CA; Kirchner FK
    Urology; 1984 Sep; 24(3):297-9. PubMed ID: 6382739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Contrast agent induced thrombophlebitis following leg phlebography: iopamidol versus meglumine iothalamate.
    Lea Thomas M; Keeling FP; Piaggio RB; Treweeke PS
    Br J Radiol; 1984 Mar; 57(675):205-7. PubMed ID: 6365232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.