ライフサイエンスコーパス: contrast material

1 fter imaging (>1 day after administration of contrast material).

2 ine- [P > .12] or gadolinium-based [P > .13] contrast material).

3 fat suppression without oral or intravenous contrast material.

4 otocol performed without intravenous or oral contrast material.

5 T MR imaging with or without intra-articular contrast material.

6 opylene bottle filled with diluted iodinated contrast material.

7 ) clinical-grade VEGFR2-targeted microbubble contrast material.

8 e fifth dimension represents the dynamics of contrast material.

9 ment of post-CT AKI, regardless of iodinated contrast material.

10 image intervals by using a gadolinium-based contrast material.

11 osis of vascular versus enteric extravasated contrast material.

12 5-T imaging, with or without intra-articular contrast material.

13 tes (EP) after intravenous administration of contrast material.

14 the vascular system after administration of contrast material.

15 me profiles reflecting the administration of contrast material.

16 in three automated phases after injection of contrast material.

17 ike or unknown-type reaction to iodine-based contrast material.

18 ffuse pattern after intravenous injection of contrast material.

19 of intravenous iodine- and gadolinium-based contrast material.

20 g them is to create a composite by combining contrasting materials.

21 on after administration of low-concentration contrast material (170 mg of iodine per milliliter), and

22 d with respect to likelihood of receiving IV contrast material (19 tested covariates).

23 (MR) imaging was performed with and without contrast material 2 or 7 days after ablation.

24 nces were discussed i.e. 1. Gadolinium-based contrast materials, 2. hemoglobin degradation products 3

25 d for all patients who received a dose of CM contrast material 250 mL or greater while they underwent

26 likelihood of patient receiving intravenous contrast material (36 tested covariates).

27 odium) diluted in either saline or iodinated contrast material (50% and full-strength iohexol 300).

28 A total of 140 neonates who received contrast material (59 who underwent CT with iohexol or i

29 rves obtained after injection of microbubble contrast material 6 weeks after beginning pharmacologic

30 The average volume of CM contrast material administered was 172 mL in the control

31 index (BMI) (odds ratio, 0.9), and repeated contrast material administration (odds ratio, 2.8) were

32 bowel wall arterial phase enhancement after contrast material administration at baseline (rho = -0.5

33 Intravenous contrast material administration was not associated with

34 Heart failure, low BMI, and repeated contrast material administration were identified as risk

35 in the hepatobiliary phase (20 minutes after contrast material administration), and relative enhancem

36 For images obtained 20 minutes after contrast material administration, the dual IR sequence p

37 patient's renal status precluded intravenous contrast material administration.

38 ive agent in diminished renal function after contrast material administration.

39 odinated contrast material within 8 hours of contrast material administration.

40 tinine level changes occurred 24 hours after contrast material administration.

41 RE sequences were performed before and after contrast material administration.

42 time-varying concentration curves of various contrast material administrations in each organ for diff

43 -gated micro-CT by using both a conventional contrast material and a novel iodinated MMCM.

44 phic (CT) scan of the kidney with the use of contrast material and an iothalamate-based measurement o

45 ence was not significantly different between contrast material and non-contrast material groups in an

46 injected at 2.5 mL/sec; phases 3-4, 40 mL of contrast material and saline injected at 2.5 mL/sec); bo

47 njected in four phases (phases 1-2, 60 mL of contrast material and saline injected at 2.5 mL/sec; pha

48 hantom was filled with nonionic iodine-based contrast material, and a gadolinium-filled capsule repre

49 T MR imaging with or without intra-articular contrast material appears to improve diagnostic accuracy

50 as in enterography, large volumes of enteric contrast material are administered orally.

51 ntravenous and bismuth subsalicylate enteric contrast material at DE CT.

52 precise allocation of high refractive-index contrast materials at independently addressable radial a

53 ty by 10 minutes after the administration of contrast material before plateauing.

54 erformed after intravenous administration of contrast material before tumor resection.

55 The duration of contrast material bolus (0.5 mL/kg of body weight) was 3

56 Duration of contrast material bolus injection does not influence CT

57 Many factors other than contrast material can affect post-CT AKI rates.

58 te that multivolume (1)H MR imaging, without contrast material, can be used as a biomarker for region

59 Adherent contrast material coating on these polyps aids in their

60 ermine maximal lesion width and height, oral contrast material coating, segmental location, and compu

61 3-T imaging, with or without intra-articular contrast material compared with 1.5-T imaging, with or w

62 uations, the solutions to which provided the contrast material concentration time curves for each com

63 Quantitative measurements of contrast material concentrations in the colon and polyp

64 appropriately and used in conjunction with a contrast material containing a high concentration of iod

65 After contrast material delivery, relative percentage of enhan

66 the high-dose cohort, 36 (46%) received a CM contrast material dose between 250 and 299 mL, 29 (37%)

67 ine was seen in two of the four high-dose CM contrast material dose categories: 250-299 mL (decrease

68 ted of comparable patients who received a CM contrast material dose of 75-249 mL during the same peri

69 undergo neuroendovascular procedures with CM contrast material doses of 250 mL or greater.

70 intravenous administration of iodixanol for contrast material enhanced CT was not an independent ris

71 T2 weighted, diffusion weighted, and dynamic contrast-material enhanced) and nerve-sparing robot-assi

72 Intravenous contrast material-enhanced (100 mL of Omnipaque 350; GE

73 ght of these findings, the patient underwent contrast material-enhanced (120 mL of iopromide, Ultravi

74 Intravenous contrast material-enhanced (120 mL of Omnipaque 350; Nyc

75 and pelvis was performed and was followed by contrast material-enhanced (80 mL of iopamidol) computed

76 Baseline arterial phase contrast material-enhanced (CE) MR imaging was used to m

77 background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) at contrast material-enhanced (CE) spectral mammography and

78 ith abdominal aneurysm repair also underwent contrast material-enhanced (CE) ultrasonography (US).

79 All contrast material-enhanced (contrast group) and unenhanc

80 All contrast material-enhanced (contrast group) and unenhanc

81 To evaluate the association between dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) and diffusion-weighted

82 to moderate for features related to dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) imaging (kappa = 0.266-

83 The authors retrospectively analyzed dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR)

84 e perfusion patterns at quantitative dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR)

85 low-up included US, mammography, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR)

86 ast agent for their applicability in dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR)

87 llular carcinoma (HCC) measured with dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance (MR)

88 with DCIS who underwent preoperative dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) MR imaging between 2004

89 R2)-targeted microbubbles and (b) 3D dynamic contrast material-enhanced (DCE) US by using nontargeted

90 reoperative work-up included a water-soluble contrast material-enhanced (iodixanol, 320 mg of iodine

91 puted tomography (CT)-guided RF ablation and contrast material-enhanced 1-month follow-up CT and/or m

92 [ADC] maps [b < 1000 sec/mm(2)], and dynamic contrast material-enhanced [DCE] MR imaging).

93 ging (diffusion-weighted MR imaging, dynamic contrast material-enhanced [DCE] MR imaging, and hydroge

94 es (T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, dynamic contrast material-enhanced [DCE] pulse sequences) and sc

95 mography tumor volume and perfusion, dynamic contrast material-enhanced and diffusion-weighted magnet

96 of the IMA, the cross-sectional area of the contrast material-enhanced aortic lumen at the level of

97 The amount of necrotic tumor tissue on contrast material-enhanced arterial phase MR images and

98 ining iodine (2, 5, and 15 mg/mL), simulated contrast material-enhanced blood, and soft-tissue insert

99 with brain tumors who underwent nine or more contrast material-enhanced brain magnetic resonance (MR)

100 very, diffusion- and perfusion-weighted, and contrast material-enhanced brain magnetic resonance (MR)

101 method was tested in 42 patients undergoing contrast material-enhanced cardiac MR imaging (at 1.5 T)

102 All participants underwent equilibrium contrast material-enhanced cardiac MR imaging.

103 In vivo, the contrast material-enhanced cartilage reached a steady CT

104 graphic (CT) examination across a library of contrast material-enhanced computational patient models.

105 Contrast material-enhanced computed tomographic (CT) ima

106 titutional review board waiver was obtained, contrast material-enhanced computed tomographic (CT) stu

107 ey from unilateral nephrectomy who underwent contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) at t

108 Unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) imag

109 on tomography (PET) combined with diagnostic contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) in d

110 roid prophylaxis administered 5 hours before contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) is n

111 Thus, contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of t

112 -including chest radiography; bone scanning; contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of t

113 Contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of t

114 ars old) underwent unenhanced MR imaging and contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of t

115 10 patients undergoing either unenhanced or contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) serv

116 Posttreatment evaluation was conducted with contrast material-enhanced computed tomography in the li

117 years) at one institution who had undergone contrast material-enhanced computed tomography of the pe

118 ation zone was identified with postprocedure contrast material-enhanced computed tomography.

119 h nonenhanced CT to assess calcium score and contrast material-enhanced coronary CT angiography were

120 corticosteroid premedication regimen before contrast material-enhanced CT (n = 1424) from 2008 to 20

121 Materials and Methods Contrast material-enhanced CT examinations of the chest

122 Results from 88 thoracic and 110 abdominal contrast material-enhanced CT examinations were analyzed

123 66 of 67 (98%) ablated lesions on the first contrast material-enhanced CT images at 4-8-week follow-

124 Texture was assessed for unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced CT images by using a software

125 oved study, gene expression profile data and contrast material-enhanced CT images from 70 patients wi

126 dding unenhanced computed tomography (CT) to contrast material-enhanced CT improves the diagnostic pe

127 ients 18 years and older with unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced CT results and with lesions e

128 us cholecystitis and for whom a preoperative contrast material-enhanced CT study was available were p

129 Contrast material-enhanced CT texture parameters were as

130 Contrast material-enhanced CT was used to assess techniq

131 A total of 179 patients underwent contrast material-enhanced CT, and 66 patients underwent

132 Contrast material-enhanced dual-energy CT and convention

133 Purpose To determine whether single-phase contrast material-enhanced dual-energy material attenuat

134 cinoma at pathologic analysis, who underwent contrast material-enhanced dual-energy nephrographic pha

135 Contrast material-enhanced dual-phase multidetector row

136 Patients underwent contrast material-enhanced electrocardiography-gated car

137 rying iodinated contrast agent to create the contrast material-enhanced five-dimensional XCAT models,

138 , mass effect, or hydrocephalus (HMH) at non-contrast material-enhanced head computed tomographic (CT

139 the difference in R2* (DeltaR2*) between the contrast material-enhanced images and baseline images.

140 Contrast material-enhanced images can depict and be used

141 Endoleaks on contrast material-enhanced images were considered the re

142 lower in attenuation than the thyroid on non-contrast material-enhanced images, but patterns differed

143 33.3% for width measurements on T1-weighted contrast material-enhanced images.

144 The neonates who underwent contrast material-enhanced imaging and the neonates who

145 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging before prostatectomy

146 Advanced contrast material-enhanced imaging techniques are capabl

147 culitis that were not seen at unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced imaging with gadopentetate di

148 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging) obtained before radi

149 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging, and by using the sum

150 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging, were included.

151 ing, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging, with a pelvic phased

152 ighted, diffusion-weighted [DW], and dynamic contrast material-enhanced imaging.

153 t magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, including contrast material-enhanced LGE imaging and T1 mapping.

154 east 10 mm were recruited to undergo dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

155 Contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

156 nts with GBM underwent baseline imaging with contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

157 eters at baseline were estimated by means of contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

158 equence paradigm and limited role of dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

159 e-matched control subjects underwent dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

160 Post-PAE prostate ischemia was measured with contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imagi

161 ured at baseline and after the first TACE on contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance images.

162 me were assessed with dynamic susceptibility contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in

163 Materials and Methods Contrast material-enhanced MR angiography was performed

164 imensional ablation lengths were measured on contrast material-enhanced MR images, and bone remodelin

165 Delayed contrast material-enhanced MR imaging allowed simultaneo

166 11, 58 premenopausal women who had undergone contrast material-enhanced MR imaging and MR imaging-gui

167 All participants underwent contrast material-enhanced MR imaging and ultrasonograph

168 ance (MR) imaging and dynamic susceptibility contrast material-enhanced MR imaging at baseline and at

169 Women underwent standard dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging for further assess

170 3)Na and DWI sequences were performed before contrast material-enhanced MR imaging in patients with b

171 terial vessel wall imaging at unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced MR imaging of the aortic, car

172 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging prior to radical p

173 es measuring at least 1 cm who underwent two contrast material-enhanced MR imaging studies at least 3

174 a System category 4 or 5 at clinical dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging that subsequently

175 T2- and T1-weighted dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging was performed befo

176 All studies in which contrast material-enhanced MR imaging was used for asses

177 In coinjection tumors, dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging was used to measur

178 T2-weighted; diffusion-weighted; and dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging with a 3-T imager

179 ighted MR imaging, 0.42 and 0.28; at dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging, 0.23 and 0.24, an

180 With contrast material-enhanced MR imaging, additional tissue

181 is: noncontrast MR cholangiopancreatography, contrast material-enhanced MR imaging/MR cholangiopancre

182 All patients underwent a non-contrast material-enhanced MR protocol that included rou

183 s were discovered incidentally at multiphase contrast material-enhanced multidetector computed tomogr

184 The patient underwent contrast material-enhanced multidetector computed tomogr

185 tient underwent erect abdominal radiography, contrast material-enhanced multidetector row computed to

186 T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced multiparametric MR imaging of

187 Contrast material-enhanced multiphase MR imaging was per

188 Contrast material-enhanced myocardial perfusion imaging

189 examine the subsequent quantitative dynamic contrast material-enhanced parameters in breast cancer w

190 ges were acquired in unenhanced and standard contrast material-enhanced phases, with observation diam

191 d a gadolinium-filled capsule representing a contrast material-enhanced polyp was positioned on the c

192 ging in comparison with full multiparametric contrast material-enhanced prostate MR imaging in men wi

193 d PET/MR imaging with diffusion-weighted and contrast material-enhanced sequences after unenhanced PE

194 se To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast material-enhanced spectral mammography and brea

195 the entire primary tumor were assessed with contrast material-enhanced staging CT studies obtained i

196 Patients underwent diagnostic contrast material-enhanced study prior to the first dila

197 dial iron quantification, and unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced T1 mapping.

198 texture features) from the multiparametric (contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted and fluid-attenua

199 Disruption was evaluated at contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonanc

200 using software at T2-weighted MR imaging and contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging.

201 ension were examined at 1.5 T with a dynamic contrast material-enhanced three-dimensional fast low-an

202 Purpose To demonstrate the feasibility of contrast material-enhanced ulrasonographic (US) nephrost

203 Purpose To assess whether contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) can be u

204 can be reproduced in future clinical trials, contrast material-enhanced ultrasound (US) of targeted M

205 icle describes the successful integration of contrast material-enhanced US into a multimodality appro

206 Targeted contrast material-enhanced US signal was quantified 5 mi

207 In vivo targeted contrast material-enhanced US signal was quantitatively

208 eft anterior descending artery (LAD), and 20 contrast material-enhanced volume scans were acquired pe

209 ypes 1 and 2) who underwent a comprehensive, contrast material-enhanced whole-body MR imaging protoco

210 On T1-weighted (unenhanced and contrast material-enhanced), T2-weighted, and DWI (b = 1

211 al oblique and sagittal T2-weighted, dynamic contrast material-enhanced, and diffusion-weighted imagi

212 iparametric MR imaging (T2-weighted, dynamic contrast material-enhanced, and diffusion-weighted seque

213 Purpose To compare contrast material enhancement of glioblastoma multiforme

214 sis showed significant agreement in terms of contrast material enhancement, nonenhancement, necrosis,

215 olumes of interest were placed: regions with contrast material enhancement, regions with highest and

216 between the luminal B subtype and a dynamic contrast material-enhancement feature that quantifies th

217 used to evaluate the causal relation between contrast material exposure and AKI by evaluating patient

218 The effects of contrast material exposure on the rate of acute kidney i

219 The effects of contrast material exposure on the rate of AKI--defined a

220 had higher rates of dialysis and mortality, contrast material exposure was not an independent risk f

221 However, the risk of AKI is independent of contrast material exposure, even in patients with eGFR o

222 1000 mL of isotonic saline before and after contrast material exposure.

223 ID was defined as an intimal disruption with contrast material-filled outpouching from the aorta lume

224 edge of fluoroscopic anatomy and patterns of contrast material flow guide the planning and execution

225 ents received a bolus injection of 0.2 mL of contrast material for qualitative and quantitative evalu

226 that are assessable by using a noninvasive, contrast material-free, and radiation-free method.

227 ike or unknown-type reaction to iodine-based contrast material from June 1, 2008, to June 30, 2016, w

228 (contrast material group) or unenhanced (non-contrast material group) CT between 2000 and 2010 were i

229 ll patients who underwent contrast-enhanced (contrast material group) or unenhanced (non-contrast mat

230 ntrast material (radiopaque microsphere plus contrast material group), and 70-150-mum radiolucent mic

231 ast material (nonradiopaque microsphere plus contrast material group).

232 different between contrast material and non-contrast material groups in any eGFR subgroup; for the s

233 Intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast material had a significant effect on the develo

234 intravenous administration of low-osmolality contrast material in 112.

235 formed without intravenous administration of contrast material in 155 patients and with intravenous a

236 t chest computed tomography with intravenous contrast material in 2008 were reviewed.

237 n gadolinium-based and nonionic iodine-based contrast material in a colon phantom by using the charac

238 ureteral flow was defined by the presence of contrast material in the bladder.

239 cal injection protocols, the dynamics of the contrast material in the body were described according t

240 of 1 molar (containing 1 mol/mL gadobutrol) contrast material in the differentiation of malignant an

241 sion A technique to model the propagation of contrast material in XCAT human models was developed.

242 of CIN was not significantly different from contrast material-independent AKI.

243 CT AKI by using traditional SCr criteria for contrast material-induced nephrotoxicity (CIN; SCr incre

244 as a single bolus; or protocol B, 100 mL of contrast material injected in four phases (phases 1-2, 6

245 , craniocaudal scan direction with 100 mL of contrast material injected intravenously as a single bol

246 using region of interest measurements before contrast material injection and in the hepatobiliary pha

247 olving along with the development of various contrast material injection protocols and multiphasic CB

248 d portal venous phase imaging, with a single contrast material injection timed with bolus tracking 15

249 Atrial fibrillation and shorter time from contrast material injection to image acquisition were in

250 T1 time 12 minutes after contrast material injection was significantly associated

251 T1 time 25 minutes after contrast material injection was significantly associated

252 cho-planar imaging sequence performed during contrast material injection, yielding high-isotropic-res

253 p a method to incorporate the propagation of contrast material into computational anthropomorphic pha

254 ded intranodal injection of gadolinium-based contrast material into the inguinal lymph nodes, combine

255 ntravenous administration of the iso-osmolar contrast material (IOCM) iodixanol 320 and patients who

256 Intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast material is a nephrotoxic risk factor, but not

257 In enteroclysis, enteric contrast material is administered through a nasoenteric

258 ith intranodal injection of gadolinium-based contrast material is feasible and can provide useful inf

259 single scan: 70 seconds before CT, 100 mL of contrast material is injected for the portal venous phas

260 s, the total cumulative dose of iodine-based contrast material is minimized and the risk of acute nep

261 Contrast material is often required to clearly visualize

262 Intravenous administration of low-osmolality contrast material is significantly associated with exace

263 Contrast material maps clearly differentiated the distri

264 We found that the contrast material maps clearly differentiated the distri

265 or cecal location, surface coating with oral contrast material, multiple CAD hits, advanced yet typic

266 , and 70-150-mum radiolucent microspheres in contrast material (nonradiopaque microsphere plus contra

267 nto two types: type 1, which was filled with contrast material on MR arthrograms, and type 2, which w

268 the need to consider the effect of iodinated contrast material on the organ doses to patients undergo

269 eported allergy to iodine, iodine-containing contrast material, or shellfish were identified and thei

270 The models with added contrast material propagation can be applied to simulate

271 lution of coexisting mesoscopic domains with contrasting material properties are critical in creating

272 f acquisition and reconstruction parameters, contrast material protocol injections, and radiation dos

273 roup), 70-150-mum radiopaque microspheres in contrast material (radiopaque microsphere plus contrast

274 Five radiologists blinded to the contrast material rated motion on a scale of 1 (no motio

275 he group with nonradiopaque microspheres and contrast material, retained tumoral contrast remained qu

276 In contrast, material shed almost continuously from contine

277 ength high-resolution GRE MR imaging without contrast material shows promise as a marker for increase

278 lectron detection can be used to obtain high-contrast, material-specific images of an organic photovo

279 Multivariate analysis showed that contrast material tagging markedly improved serrated pol

280 tologic findings; and presence or absence of contrast material tagging.

281 In contrast, materials that promote alphavbeta3 integrin bi

282 At the time of each reaction to contrast material, the patient's age and sex, whether pr

283 ly 35 seconds later by injection of 40 mL of contrast material to boost the pancreatic phase.

284 formed without intravenous administration of contrast material to evaluate the brain.

285 ratio of 2.94 for the lack of rapid initial contrast material uptake and of 2.38 for the lack of was

286 ratio was 4.00 for not having rapid initial contrast material uptake in patients with a personal his

287 Additional contrast material volume administered was 23 mL +/- 12.9

288 Mean and median contrast material volume at index imaging were 24 mL +/-

289 ime to transplantation, waiting list status, contrast material volume at index imaging, and additiona

290 after (period 2) the cessation of extrinsic contrast material warming (37 degrees C) for intravenous

291 Similar results were obtained when contrast material was added to radiopaque microspheres,

292 tion multidetector CT while a 10-mL bolus of contrast material was injected upstream of the imaging p

293 For the 80- and 100-kV protocols, 80 mL of contrast material was injected, versus 45 mL for the 70-

294 Surface retention of oral contrast material was noted in all 18 cases.

295 of the sinuses without and with intravenous contrast material was performed.

296 A syringe filled with diluted iodine contrast material was placed into 30-, 35-, and 45-cm-wi

297 ept for micro-CT, which demonstrated soluble contrast material washout over time.

298 ns before and after intravenous injection of contrast material, we measured the evolution of lesional

299 eft ventricles and the severity of reflux of contrast material were assessed.

300 icted CIN in patients who received iodinated contrast material within 8 hours of contrast material ad