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.
134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7993991)
1. Time to abandon nonionic contrast. Conlon PJ; Schwab SJ J Am Soc Nephrol; 1994 Aug; 5(2):123-4. PubMed ID: 7993991 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Radiologists dither over use of nonionic contrast. Tilke B Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1998 Feb; 20(2):31-3. PubMed ID: 10187443 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Should nonionic radiographic contrast media be given to all patients? Parfrey PS; Cramer BC; McManamon PJ CMAJ; 1988 Mar; 138(6):497-500. PubMed ID: 3278782 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. [Economics and efficacy of the use of contrast media]. Seyferth W Aktuelle Radiol; 1991 Nov; 1(6):294-7. PubMed ID: 1821632 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Applying cost-effectiveness analysis. The inside story. Eddy DM JAMA; 1992 Nov; 268(18):2575-82. PubMed ID: 1404827 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The cost-effectiveness of replacing high-osmolality with low-osmolality contrast media. Caro JJ; Trindade E; McGregor M AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1992 Oct; 159(4):869-74. PubMed ID: 1529856 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Ionic vs. nonionic contrast media. Lloyd K Radiol Technol; 1994; 66(1):57-9. PubMed ID: 7997528 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Survey of contrast media use in southeastern U.S. hospitals. Utter DP Radiol Technol; 1997; 68(5):386-90. PubMed ID: 9170181 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Contrast media cost analysis--I. Zbrozek AS J Am Coll Cardiol; 1994 Mar; 23(3):826; author reply 827-8. PubMed ID: 8113571 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Selective use of radiographic low-osmolality contrast media in the 1990s. Ellis JH; Cohan RH; Sonnad SS; Cohan NS Radiology; 1996 Aug; 200(2):297-311. PubMed ID: 8685315 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Contrast media cost analysis--II. Olukotun AY J Am Coll Cardiol; 1994 Mar; 23(3):826-7; author reply 827-8. PubMed ID: 8113572 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Medical and economic considerations in using a new contrast medium. Fischer HW; Spataro RF; Rosenberg PM Arch Intern Med; 1986 Sep; 146(9):1717-21. PubMed ID: 3092757 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A case for nonionic contrast media--despite the high cost. Lieberman EB; Bashore TM J Crit Illn; 1992 Dec; 7(12):1853-4, 1860. PubMed ID: 10148097 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Conversion to nonionics packs economic punch. Brumbaugh J; Young SW; Cohen D Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1991 Jul; 13(7):99-104. PubMed ID: 10149725 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost of preventing adverse reactions to low-osmolar contrast agents. Millward SF Radiology; 1994 Jun; 191(3):871-2. PubMed ID: 8184084 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Iodinated contrast media and contrast-induced nephropathy: is there a preferred cost-effective agent? Sharma SK J Invasive Cardiol; 2008 May; 20(5):245-8. PubMed ID: 18460711 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Contrast agents for cardiac catheterization: conceptions and misconceptions. Brogan WC; Hillis LD; Lange RA Am Heart J; 1991 Oct; 122(4 Pt 1):1129-35. PubMed ID: 1927863 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]