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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

82 related items for PubMed ID: 2801427

  • 1. Current use of low-osmolality contrast agents: results of a survey.
    Bettmann MA, Geller SC, McClennan B, Dunnick NR.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Nov; 153(5):1079-83. PubMed ID: 2801427
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Informed consent for intravenous contrast-enhanced radiography: a national survey of practice and opinion.
    Spring DB, Akin JR, Margulis AR.
    Radiology; 1984 Sep; 152(3):609-13. PubMed ID: 6463241
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Informed consent for interventional radiology procedures: a survey detailing current European practice.
    O'Dwyer HM, Lyon SM, Fotheringham T, Lee MJ.
    Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2003 Sep; 26(5):428-33. PubMed ID: 14753299
    [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Clinical integration of three-dimensional helical CT angiography into academic radiology: results of a focused survey.
    Smith PA, Fishman EK.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Aug; 173(2):445-7. PubMed ID: 10430151
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. [Current patterns of the use of heparin in angiography].
    Miller DL.
    J Radiol; 1990 Mar; 71(3):151-7. PubMed ID: 2191118
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Use of low-osmolality contrast media in a price-sensitive environment.
    Steinberg EP, Anderson GF, Powe NR, Sakin JW, Kinnison ML, Neuman P, White RI.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Aug; 151(2):271-4. PubMed ID: 3260719
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Use of informed consent for ionic and nonionic contrast media.
    Lambe HA, Hopper KD, Matthews YL.
    Radiology; 1992 Jul; 184(1):145-8. PubMed ID: 1609071
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Acute and late adverse reactions to low-osmolal contrast media.
    Mikkonen R, Kontkanen T, Kivisaari L.
    Acta Radiol; 1995 Jan; 36(1):72-6. PubMed ID: 7833173
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Use of low-osmolar agents and premedication to reduce the frequency of adverse reactions to radiographic contrast media: a survey of the Society of Uroradiology.
    Cohan RH, Ellis JH, Dunnick NR.
    Radiology; 1995 Feb; 194(2):357-64. PubMed ID: 7824710
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Intravenous use of ionic and nonionic contrast agents in children.
    Cohen MD, Smith JA.
    Radiology; 1994 Jun; 191(3):793-4. PubMed ID: 8184066
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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 13; 326(7):425-30. PubMed ID: 1732769
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Heparin in angiography: current patterns of use.
    Miller DL.
    Radiology; 1989 Sep 13; 172(3 Pt 2):1007-11. PubMed ID: 2672098
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Evaluation of intravascular low-osmolality contrast agents.
    Swanson DP, Thrall JH, Shetty PC.
    Clin Pharm; 1986 Nov 13; 5(11):877-91. PubMed ID: 3780159
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. A prospective trial of ionic vs nonionic contrast agents in routine clinical practice: comparison of adverse effects.
    Wolf GL, Arenson RL, Cross AP.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 May 13; 152(5):939-44. PubMed ID: 2495706
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Decision analysis to assess cost-effectiveness of low-osmolality contrast medium for intravenous urography.
    Calvo MV, Pilar del Val M, Mar Alvarez M, Domínguez-Gil A.
    Am J Hosp Pharm; 1992 Mar 13; 49(3):577-84. PubMed ID: 1598930
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 5.