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.
62 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6812399)
1. Angiographic contrast agents: conventional and new media compared. Bettmann MA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1982 Oct; 139(4):787-94. PubMed ID: 6812399 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Iodinated contrast media and the role of renal replacement therapy. Weisbord SD; Palevsky PM Adv Chronic Kidney Dis; 2011 May; 18(3):199-206. PubMed ID: 21531326 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Contrast media and percutaneous coronary interventions]. Aubry P; Halna du Fretay X; Tchetche D Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris); 2007 Jan; 56(1):2-9. PubMed ID: 17343032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Pharmacology of nonionic roentgen contrast media]. Turnheim K Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1986 May; 98(11):333-8. PubMed ID: 3727593 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Adverse reactions to contrast media: factors that determine the cost of treatment. Powe NR; Moore RD; Steinberg EP AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Nov; 161(5):1089-95. PubMed ID: 8273616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Pharmacokinetics and tolerance of roentgen contrast media]. Schmiedel E Rontgenblatter; 1987 Jan; 40(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 3547606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. [Current problems with delayed reactions to intravascular administration of nonionic contrast media]. Beyer-Enke SA Aktuelle Radiol; 1996 Nov; 6(6):330-3. PubMed ID: 9081406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Safety and cost effectiveness of high-osmolality as compared with low-osmolality contrast material in patients undergoing cardiac angiography. Steinberg EP; Moore RD; Powe NR; Gopalan R; Davidoff AJ; Litt M; Graziano S; Brinker JA N Engl J Med; 1992 Feb; 326(7):425-30. PubMed ID: 1732769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A new method to assess the fluidodynamic behaviour of an angiographic contrast agent. Novario R; Tanzi F; Bianchi C; Lorusso R; Goddi A; Vermiglio G; Conte L Radiol Med; 2002 Apr; 103(4):396-406. PubMed ID: 12107390 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of nonionic, low-osmolality radiocontrast agents with ionic, high-osmolality agents during cardiac catheterization. Barrett BJ; Parfrey PS; Vavasour HM; O'Dea F; Kent G; Stone E N Engl J Med; 1992 Feb; 326(7):431-6. PubMed ID: 1732770 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Development of antituberculous drugs: current status and future prospects]. Tomioka H; Namba K Kekkaku; 2006 Dec; 81(12):753-74. PubMed ID: 17240921 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]