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.
130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9609886)
1. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part I. Prediction with a computer model. Bae KT; Heiken JP; Brink JA Radiology; 1998 Jun; 207(3):647-55. PubMed ID: 9609886 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Estimation of aortic time-enhancement curve in pharmacokinetic analysis: dynamic study by multi-detector row computed tomography]. Yamaguchi I; Hayashi H; Suzuki M; Kidoya E; Higashimura K Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2007 Jun; 63(6):621-7. PubMed ID: 17625352 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Contrast media in abdominal computed tomography: optimization of delivery methods. Han JK; Choi BI; Kim AY; Kim SJ Korean J Radiol; 2001; 2(1):28-36. PubMed ID: 11752966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Aortic and hepatic peak enhancement at CT: effect of contrast medium injection rate--pharmacokinetic analysis and experimental porcine model. Bae KT; Heiken JP; Brink JA Radiology; 1998 Feb; 206(2):455-64. PubMed ID: 9457200 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical evaluation of a computer simulated prediction model of contrast enhancement of the liver in spiral CT. Schöber W; Kopp A; Scherf C; Mehnert F; Heuschmid M; Duda SH; Claussen CD; Pereira P Eur J Radiol; 2004 Jul; 51(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 15186880 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Simulation of aortic peak enhancement on MDCT using a contrast material flow phantom: feasibility study. Awai K; Hatcho A; Nakayama Y; Kusunoki S; Liu D; Hatemura M; Funama Y; Denbo M; Sato N; Yamashita Y AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Feb; 186(2):379-85. PubMed ID: 16423942 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Aortic and hepatic contrast medium enhancement at CT. Part II. Effect of reduced cardiac output in a porcine model. Bae KT; Heiken JP; Brink JA Radiology; 1998 Jun; 207(3):657-62. PubMed ID: 9609887 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Application of pharmacokinetics to computed tomography: injection rates and schemes: mono-, bi-, or multiphasic? Krause W Invest Radiol; 1996 Feb; 31(2):91-100. PubMed ID: 8750444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Peak contrast enhancement in CT and MR angiography: when does it occur and why? Pharmacokinetic study in a porcine model. Bae KT Radiology; 2003 Jun; 227(3):809-16. PubMed ID: 12702823 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Hepatic CT enhancement: effect of the rate and volume of contrast medium injection in an animal model. Garcia P; Genin G; Bret PM; Bonaldi VM; Reinhold C; Atri M Abdom Imaging; 1999; 24(6):597-603. PubMed ID: 10525816 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Factors influencing vascular and hepatic enhancement at CT: experimental study on injection protocol using a canine model. Han JK; Kim AY; Lee KY; Seo JB; Kim TK; Choi BI; Lhee CS; Han MC J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2000; 24(3):400-6. PubMed ID: 10864075 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Effect of Contrast Material on Radiation Dose at CT: Part I. Incorporation of Contrast Material Dynamics in Anthropomorphic Phantoms. Sahbaee P; Segars WP; Marin D; Nelson RC; Samei E Radiology; 2017 Jun; 283(3):739-748. PubMed ID: 28092496 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Use of contrast material for spiral CT of the abdomen: comparison of hepatic enhancement and vascular attenuation for three different contrast media at two different delay times. Herts BR; Paushter DM; Einstein DM; Zepp R; Friedman RA; Obuchowski N AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Feb; 164(2):327-31. PubMed ID: 7839963 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT of the liver: comparison of contrast medium injection rates and uniphasic and biphasic injection protocols. Heiken JP; Brink JA; McClennan BL; Sagel SS; Forman HP; DiCroce J Radiology; 1993 May; 187(2):327-31. PubMed ID: 8475268 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Hepatic enhancement during helical CT: a comparison of moderate rate uniphasic and biphasic contrast injection protocols. Birnbaum BA; Jacobs JE; Yin D AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Oct; 165(4):853-8. PubMed ID: 7676980 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Modeling of the contrast-enhanced perfusion test in liver based on the multi-compartment flow in porous media. Rohan E; Lukeš V; Jonášová A J Math Biol; 2018 Aug; 77(2):421-454. PubMed ID: 29368273 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Hepatic enhancement analysis in children using smart prep monitoring for 2 : 1 pitch helical scanning. Vade A; Olson MC; Vittore CP; Subbaiah P Pediatr Radiol; 1999 Sep; 29(9):689-93. PubMed ID: 10460331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Awai K; Hiraishi K; Hori S Radiology; 2004 Jan; 230(1):142-50. PubMed ID: 14695390 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]