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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4920246)

  • 1. A double-blind study of ipodate and the non-diagnostic cholecystogram.
    Newman DE; Fellows KE
    J Can Assoc Radiol; 1970 Sep; 21(3):149-52. PubMed ID: 4920246
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [The effect of diarrhea on gallbladder opacification during oral cholecystography: comparison of two cholecystographic agents (author's transl)].
    Fukuda K; Nanjo M; Harada J; Sekiya T; Kanehira Y; Anno I; Takayama M; Watanabe H; Yamada T; Yamaguchi M; Tada S
    Rinsho Hoshasen; 1979 Mar; 24(3):379-84. PubMed ID: 547079
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical comparison of tyropanoate sodium, ipodate sodium, and iopanoic acid.
    Russell JG; Frederick PR
    Radiology; 1974 Sep; 112(3):519-23. PubMed ID: 4843279
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of the double contrast media technique for oral cholecystography.
    Palmer V; Gauli A
    Radiol Technol; 1970 Mar; 41(5):284-7. PubMed ID: 5416519
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Double blind clinical comparison of two oral cholecystographic contrast media.
    Perez CA; Friedenberg MJ
    Mo Med; 1966 Jan; 63(1):46-9. PubMed ID: 5329730
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of diet and fasting on gallbladder opacification during oral cholecystography in dogs as measured by computed tomography.
    Fon GT; Hunter TB; Berk RN; Capp MP
    Radiology; 1980 Sep; 136(3):585-92. PubMed ID: 7403534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fractionated dose cholecystography: a comparison between iopanoic acid and sodium ipodate.
    Reiner RG; Lawson MJ; Davies GT; Tucker WG; Mileski O; Read TR; Grant AK
    Clin Radiol; 1980 Nov; 31(6):667-9. PubMed ID: 7214807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparative trial of three oral cholecystographic contrast media--iocetamic acid, iopanoic acid and sodium ipodate.
    Cargill A; Hately W
    Br J Radiol; 1981 Jan; 54(637):79-80. PubMed ID: 6449974
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical comparison of locetamic acid (cholebrine) and ipodate sodium (Orgrafin).
    Neal RR; Harvey KG; Cantwell KG; Press HC
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1979 May; 132(5):735-6. PubMed ID: 155391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Double-blind study of a new gallbladder contrast medium].
    Fork FT
    Lakartidningen; 1977 Mar; 74(10):915-7. PubMed ID: 138777
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Recent triiodinated contrast media for oral cholecystocholangiography].
    Sviridov NK; Popova ZP; Varfolomeeva VN
    Med Radiol (Mosk); 1985 Feb; 30(2):58-60. PubMed ID: 3155821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of oral cholecystopaques: iopronic acid vs. iopanoic acid.
    Amberg JR; Goldberger LA; Bates M
    Radiology; 1980 Jan; 134(1):31-2. PubMed ID: 6985742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The combined use of oral cholecystopaque media and iodipamide.
    Goergen T; Goldberger LE; Berk RN
    Radiology; 1974 Jun; 111(3):543-8. PubMed ID: 4828985
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical comparison of two contrast agents for oral cholecystography: radiologic efficacy and drug safety of iopanoic acid and iopronic acid.
    Hedlund L; Putman CE; Burrell M
    Yale J Biol Med; 1979; 52(3):257-62. PubMed ID: 380184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Double-blind study of four oral cholecystographic preparations.
    Parks RE
    Radiology; 1974 Sep; 112(3):525-8. PubMed ID: 4602064
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Uricosuria and x-ray contrast agents.
    Kelley WN
    N Engl J Med; 1971 Apr; 284(17):975-6. PubMed ID: 5573284
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Uricosuric action of cholecystographic agents. A possible factor in nephrotoxicity.
    Mudge GH
    N Engl J Med; 1971 Apr; 284(17):929-33. PubMed ID: 5551801
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Residual contrast medium in the intestines and side effects during cholecystography. A comparison between some contrast media in current use and a new medium.
    Eriksson S; Saltzman GF
    Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh); 1970 Jan; 10(1):69-75. PubMed ID: 5447107
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of three cholecystographic agents. A double-blind study with and without a prior fatty meal.
    Stanley RJ; Melson GL; Cubillo E; Hesker AE
    Radiology; 1974 Sep; 112(3):513-7. PubMed ID: 4602063
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Oragrafin, a new cholecystographic medium: a double-blind comparison with Telepaque.
    JUHL JH; COOPERMAN LR; CRUMMY AB
    Radiology; 1963 Jan; 80():87-91. PubMed ID: 13957983
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.