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 *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8273616)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparison of iohexol 300 and diatrizoate meglumine 60 for body CT: image quality, adverse reactions, and aborted/repeated examinations.
    Bernardino ME; Fishman EK; Jeffrey RB; Brown PC
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1992 Mar; 158(3):665-7. PubMed ID: 1739017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Selective use of low-osmolality contrast agents for i.v. urography and CT: safety and effect on cost.
    Hunter TB; Dye J; Duval JF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Oct; 163(4):965-8. PubMed ID: 8092044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. [Late reactions to a radiologic contrast media (Iopamidol-Bracco). Prospective study].
    Bartolucci F; Cecarini M; Gabrielli G; Abbiati R; Barberio M; Busilacchi P
    Radiol Med; 2000 Oct; 100(4):273-8. PubMed ID: 11155455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The safety and cost-effectiveness of low osmolar contrast media. Can economic analysis determine the real worth of a new technology?
    Henry DA; Evans DB; Robertson J
    Med J Aust; 1991 Jun; 154(11):766-72. PubMed ID: 1828529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Contrast medium-induced adverse reactions: economic outcome.
    Powe NR; Steinberg EP; Erickson JE; Moore RD; Smith CR; White RI; Brinker JA; Fishman EK; Zinreich SJ; Kinnison ML
    Radiology; 1988 Oct; 169(1):163-8. PubMed ID: 3420254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cost-effectiveness of iodixanol in patients at high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.
    Aspelin P; Aubry P; Fransson SG; Strasser R; Willenbrock R; Lundkvist J
    Am Heart J; 2005 Feb; 149(2):298-303. PubMed ID: 15846268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Multicenter trial of ionic versus nonionic contrast media for cardiac angiography. The Iohexol Cooperative Study.
    Hill JA; Winniford M; Cohen MB; Van Fossen DB; Murphy MJ; Halpern EF; Ludbrook PA; Wexler L; Rudnick MR; Goldfarb S
    Am J Cardiol; 1993 Oct; 72(11):770-5. PubMed ID: 8213508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Frequency and determinants of adverse reactions induced by high-osmolality contrast media.
    Moore RD; Steinberg EP; Powe NR; White RI; Brinker JA; Fishman EK; Zinreich SJ; Smith CR
    Radiology; 1989 Mar; 170(3 Pt 1):727-32. PubMed ID: 2916027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prevalence of acute reactions to iopromide: postmarketing surveillance study of 74,717 patients.
    Kopp AF; Mortele KJ; Cho YD; Palkowitsch P; Bettmann MA; Claussen CD
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Oct; 49(8):902-11. PubMed ID: 18651252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Net costs from three perspectives of using low versus high osmolality contrast medium in diagnostic angiocardiography.
    Powe NR; Davidoff AJ; Moore RD; Brinker JA; Anderson GF; Litt MR; Gopalan R; Graziano SL; Steinberg EP
    J Am Coll Cardiol; 1993 Jun; 21(7):1701-9. PubMed ID: 8496540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Nonionic low-osmolar contrast media have no impact on major adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing coronary stenting with appropriate antiplatelet therapy.
    Danzi GB; Capuano C; Sesana M; Predolini S; Baglini R
    Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2003 Dec; 60(4):477-82. PubMed ID: 14624424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Product selection criteria for intravascular ionic contrast media.
    Swanson DP; Dick TJ; Simms SM; Thrall JH
    Clin Pharm; 1985; 4(5):527-38. PubMed ID: 3902331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Prevalence of adverse reactions to radiopaque contrast reported by patients presenting for interventional pain procedure.
    Mishra RK; Heavner JE; Day M
    Pain Pract; 2013 Mar; 13(3):182-90. PubMed ID: 22726215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cost-effectiveness of unenhanced MR imaging vs contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen or pelvis.
    Lessler DS; Sullivan SD; Stergachis A
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Jul; 163(1):5-9. PubMed ID: 8010246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Tuberculosis in compromised hosts].
    Kekkaku; 2003 Nov; 78(11):717-22. PubMed ID: 14672050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Intravenous contrast media in uroradiology: evaluation of safety and tolerability in almost 50,000 patients.
    Wendt-Nordahl G; Rotert H; Trojan L; Michel MS; Peters CR; Alken P; Knoll T
    Med Princ Pract; 2006; 15(5):358-61. PubMed ID: 16888393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of patient reactions and diagnostic quality for hysterosalpingography using ionic and nonionic contrast media.
    Chen MY; Zagoria RJ; Fayez JA; Ott DJ; Van Swearingen FL
    Acad Radiol; 1995 Feb; 2(2):123-7. PubMed ID: 9419535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.