ライフサイエンスコーパス: contrast medium

1 of intravenously injected nonionic iodinated contrast medium.

2 ic (n=5) HCCs after intravenous injection of contrast medium.

3 he presence of an IV catheter or need for IV contrast medium.

4 aortic level after intravenous injection of contrast medium.

5 ement before and after injection of NC100150 contrast medium.

6 y used, low osmolar, non-ionic, radiographic contrast medium.

7 and fractional plasma volume (fPV) for each contrast medium.

8 r a standard preparation plus oral iodinated contrast medium.

9 adult patients) were obtained with 150 mL of contrast medium.

10 nts (70%) in each group received intravenous contrast medium.

11 on of intravascularly administered iodinated contrast medium.

12 ntial equations to describe the transport of contrast medium.

13 in the evaluation of the utility of a given contrast medium.

14 30 minutes after injection of macromolecular contrast medium.

15 doses (0.0025 to 0.01 ml/kg) of intravenous contrast medium.

16 achieved with food-grade cuttlefish ink as a contrast medium.

17 etastasis without application of intravenous contrast medium.

18 he anastomotic site without extravasation of contrast medium.

19 ance after intravenous administration of the contrast medium.

20 es that separate the attenuation due to each contrast medium.

21 G PET/CTE using neutral oral and intravenous contrast medium.

22 Patients received either undiluted contrast medium, 1:1 normal saline dilution, or 3:1 norm

23 ary tract but at the cost of a large dose of contrast medium (100-150 ml), high radiation dose and ma

24 e performed with, in addition to intravenous contrast medium, 250 mL of intravenous normal saline alo

25 fter intravenous injection of 50 or 70 mL of contrast medium (282 mg of iodine per milliliter).

26 avenous injection of 174-185 mL of iodinated contrast medium (300 mg iodine per milliliter).

27 myocardial infarction, shock, and volume of contrast medium administered.

28 in the absence of significant differences in contrast medium administration (mean difference, -26.07;

29 One of the challenges is with intravenous contrast medium administration and scan timing.

30 o estimate the radiation dose as a result of contrast medium administration in a typical abdominal co

31 status evaluated by BIVA immediately before contrast medium administration resulted in a significant

32 lly advanced disease and in patients in whom contrast medium administration should be avoided.

33 hancement of lesions was found similar after contrast medium administration.

34 se scanning was performed 8-10 minutes after contrast medium administration.

35 e kidney during a single examination without contrast medium administration.

36 ated to nephrotoxicity following intravenous contrast medium administration.

37 ods to prevent or treat nephrotoxicity after contrast medium administration.

38 Two patients had important reactions to contrast medium after CT angiography.

39 The frequency of extravasation of contrast medium after mechanical bolus injection is high

40 Separation of bowel lumen from vascular contrast medium allowed visualization of bowel wall enha

41 tably, simple fluid without extravasation of contrast medium also correlated with irregular bowel fun

42 min after intravenous injection of 50 ml of contrast medium and 10 mg of frusemide.

43 ntravenous (IV) administration of a bolus of contrast medium and again during vasodilator challenge (

44 amic breast MR imaging with gadolinium-based contrast medium and is intended to be performed for thre

45 Published data from clinical studies of contrast medium and physiology are reviewed and interpre

46 as in the standard protocol but composed of contrast medium and saline in a 1:1 fashion, resulting i

47 ic fluid collection without extravasation of contrast medium, and 3 patients had an abscess near the

48 ontrast medium pharmacokinetics and patient, contrast medium, and CT scanning factors associated with

49 ese usually occur only when large volumes of contrast medium are involved.

50 Among contrast inclusions, iodinated contrast medium-associated acute kidney injury occurred

51 d ventricular pacing, and injection of 32 mL contrast medium at 8 mL/s.

52 multiphasic CT scans obtained with 125 mL of contrast medium at a rate of 4 or 5 mL/sec were reviewed

53 Mean contrast medium attenuation in the right heart was signi

54 correlation (P <.05) was observed with each contrast medium between K(PS) and the histologic microva

55 om the injection start to the arrival of the contrast medium bolus in the aorta (P < .01) and the tim

56 t decreases, the times to the arrival of the contrast medium bolus in the aorta and to peak aortic an

57 isition was synchronized with passage of the contrast medium bolus through the lower extremity.

58 ring pulmonary CT angiography, the amount of contrast medium can be adjusted to the patient's body we

59 n animals that very low doses of intravenous contrast medium can produce transient but significantly

60 ion angiography with a gadolinium chelate as contrast medium can provide images of suitable quality f

61 dial perfusion from transit of intravascular contrast medium can provide useful criteria for identify

62 tion and during examinations enhanced with a contrast medium (CE-US).

63 n in patients with acute kidney injury after contrast medium (CI-AKI) is not well known.

64 The maximum Cr increase within 3 days after contrast medium (CM) administration was significantly sm

65 Results with a conventional small-molecular contrast medium (CM) were compared to those with a proto

66 the midliver after intravenous injection of contrast medium (concentration, 282 mg of iodine per mil

67 Contrast medium containing 350 mg of iodine per millilit

68 In the group that received contrast medium (contrast medium group), risk of AKI (RR

69 2004 that contained the phrases "contrast," "contrast medium," "contrast media," or "radiocontrast" a

70 Aortic root injection of contrast medium coupled with harmonic imaging can be use

71 The iodinated X-ray contrast medium diatrizoate is known to be very persiste

72 Use of oral contrast medium did not significantly improve polyp dete

73 Administration of oral iodinated contrast medium does not significantly improve polyp det

74 sions and current strategies for determining contrast medium dose for breast MR imaging.

75 perfused adipose tissue from calculation of contrast medium dose, the measured LBW protocol may less

76 timize aortoiliac enhancement while reducing contrast medium dose.

77 The amount of contrast medium during TAVI was not associated with the

78 Sixty-four contrast medium-enhanced abdominal helical CT scans (64

79 4-year period, 92 of 702 patients underwent contrast medium-enhanced CT after a total proctocolectom

80 y higher number of outpatients scheduled for contrast medium-enhanced CT met the National Kidney Foun

81 stic efficacy measures were compared against contrast medium-enhanced CT or MRI as the gold standard.

82 Contrast medium-enhanced dynamic CT was performed with a

83 Contrast medium-enhanced magnetic resonance images of ac

84 lude these agents is indicative of necrosis, contrast medium-enhanced MR imaging may be useful to qua

85 Contrast medium-enhanced MR imaging may prove useful in

86 A subgroup analysis was performed to compare contrast medium-enhanced MR imaging with nonenhanced MR

87 The estimated 170 million contrast medium-enhanced radiologic studies performed in

88 T2-weighted and contrast medium-enhanced T1-weighted MR images were obta

89 ed eighty-five patients referred for routine contrast medium-enhanced thoracic CT within 9 months wer

90 odel that may help predict organ-specific CT contrast medium enhancement for different injection prot

91 Tumor MVD affects the contrast medium enhancement of breast lesions, but other

92 Curves of contrast medium enhancement versus time were measured.

93 r before and 1 mL/kg/hr during 6 hours after contrast medium exposure.

94 /=0.5 mg/dL above baseline at 48 hours after contrast medium exposure.

95 Contrast medium extravasation, due to inadequate coverag

96 rts, and medical records of patients in whom contrast medium extravasations occurred were reviewed.

97 Contrast medium, flow rate, and catheter type each stati

98 With only 25 mL of iodinated contrast medium focused on the arterial phase, 64-detect

99 ual-syringe injector and an initial bolus of contrast medium followed by 50 mL of a 70%:30% saline-to

100 intravenous injections of nonionic iodinated contrast medium for computed tomographic examinations be

101 njection duration and bolus transfer time of contrast medium from the injection site to the aorta.

102 ence of AKI, dialysis, and death between the contrast medium group and control group.

103 In the group that received contrast medium (contrast medium group), risk of AKI (RR = 0.79; 95% conf

104 up that did not receive contrast medium (non-contrast medium group).

105 ar, compared with the risk of AKI in the non-contrast medium group.

106 mical transformations of the iodinated X-ray contrast medium (ICM) iomeprol were studied at the strea

107 posed sonicated dextrose albumin microbubble contrast medium in humans.

108 of monomeric nonionic low-osmolar iodinated contrast medium in ICU patients with multiple renal aggr

109 A single injection of contrast medium in the aortic root would provide complet

110 The intravenous contrast medium in the doses given produced no hemodynam

111 espite longer procedure time and use of more contrast medium in the OCT-guided group.

112 The contrast medium in the renal pelvis and ureters was virt

113 epentaacetic acid)34, a prototype blood-pool contrast medium, in 14 rats with a subcutaneously implan

114 Conclusion The administration of contrast medium increases the total radiation dose.

115 study groups were at high risk of developing contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury according to

116 itioning before contrast medium use prevents contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury in high-risk

117 Contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury is associate

118 Contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury occurred in

119 impact of remote ischemic preconditioning on contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury.

120 e reduction of glomerular filtration rate in contrast medium-induced acute kidney injury.

121 The primary end point was the incidence of contrast medium-induced kidney injury, defined as an inc

122 n with sodium chloride for the prevention of contrast medium-induced nephropathy in patients with mod

123 Controlled contrast medium-induced nephropathy studies demonstrate

124 ted as a possible strategy for prevention of contrast medium-induced nephropathy, a common cause of r

125 m body weight, with a decreased incidence of contrast medium-induced nephropathy, as compared with si

126 ed (20% more than once), before an iodinated contrast medium infusion (contrast inclusions, n=307) or

127 an intrahospital transfer without iodinated contrast medium infusion (control inclusions, n=170).

128 Contrary to iodinated contrast medium infusion (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confiden

129 lusions, matched on propensity for iodinated contrast medium infusion, the incidence of acute kidney

130 acute kidney injury, regardless of iodinated contrast medium infusion.

131 s: standard CTPA (100-120 kVp) with standard contrast medium injection (n = 46) and dual-energy CTPA

132 enhancement curves were generated by varying contrast medium injection duration from 1 to 40 seconds.

133 The effect of contrast medium injection rate on the time and magnitude

134 SR MR imaging data acquired before and after contrast medium injection showed spectrally inhomogeneou

135 l-resolution SW MR images without the aid of contrast medium injection.

136 tained 45 and 80 seconds after initiation of contrast medium injection.

137 ging and the introduction of a delay between contrast-medium injection and imaging.

138 verity to the index reaction, and subsequent contrast medium injections usually do not induce repeat

139 ental imaging after aortic root injection of contrast medium, intermittent imaging was not superior t

140 maining 30 patients, 17 had extravasation of contrast medium into the peritoneal cavity or the presac

141 e standard protocol group received 150 mL of contrast medium intravenously at 4 mL/sec.

142 t to compare the nephrotoxicity of isosmolar contrast medium (IOCM) iodixanol with low-osmolar contra

143 rable iodine delivery rates, the iso-osmolar contrast medium iodixanol 270 is not inferior to low-osm

144 um iopamidol with that of the iso-osmolality contrast medium iodixanol in high-risk patients.

145 ne within 3 days after the administration of contrast medium (iodixanol).

146 the renal tolerability of the low-osmolality contrast medium iopamidol with that of the iso-osmolalit

147 iodixanol 270 is not inferior to low-osmolar contrast medium iopromide 300 for assessment of coronary

148 on in the immature skeleton, while the ionic contrast medium is better for evaluating cartilage fixed

149 dolinium-based contrast agents: The nonionic contrast medium is better suited for evaluating perfusio

150 After virtual elimination of contrast medium, large (>2.9 mm) and high-attenuation (>

151 Presacral and free extravasation of contrast medium led to an increased need for permanent d

152 Intravenous MR contrast medium may be applied only if the exact tumor e

153 ium followed by 50 mL of a 70%:30% saline-to-contrast medium mixture and a 30-mL saline chaser.

154 ively evaluate the ability of macromolecular contrast medium (MMCM)-enhanced dynamic magnetic resonan

155 irty-one patients had extravasation of ionic contrast medium; nine of these had extravasation of at l

156 e outcomes in the group that did not receive contrast medium (non-contrast medium group).

157 In 3D images, contrast medium occupied 39.0% to 52.1% of the entire SC

158 ment that was obscured by intraluminal bowel contrast medium on conventional CT scans.

159 were obtained for the Effect of Iso-osmolar Contrast Medium on Coronary Opacification and Heart Rhyt

160 nd stone size, as well as attenuation of the contrast medium, on the stone detection rate were assess

161 phy: 25 were injected by using a monophasic, contrast-medium-only protocol with a single-syringe inje

162 In this article, contrast medium pharmacokinetics and patient, contrast m

163 Liu et al (1) have shown that iodinated contrast medium preferentially vasoconstricts the glomer

164 enous LOCM in 175 patients with a history of contrast medium reactions were reviewed.

165 ntaneous Reporting System, data on iodinated contrast medium-related deaths after LOCM became availab

166 In 1967-1994, more than 1,000 contrast medium-related deaths were reported, 850 occurr

167 r 1978-1994 do not show a marked decrease in contrast medium-related deaths.

168 To retrospectively evaluate the amount of contrast medium required with 16- and 64-section compute

169 Intraarterial ultra-low volume of contrast medium results in its satisfactory blood concen

170 Extravasation of nonionic iodinated contrast medium results only rarely in moderate or sever

171 thus enabling substantial radiation dose and contrast medium savings as compared with second-generati

172 nteen patients had extravasation of nonionic contrast medium; seven of these had extravasation of at

173 Substantially reduced doses of contrast medium, shorter scanning durations, and narrowe

174 In contrast, medium taken from cells exposed to inactivated

175 sequently, 64-section CT required 17.6% less contrast medium than did 16-section CT (85.4 mL vs 103.6

176 who underwent mechanical bolus injection of contrast medium through a plastic cannula in an upper ex

177 nstrates that power injection of intravenous contrast medium through central venous catheters does no

178 tive contributions of injection duration and contrast medium traveling time and may well be explained

179 p analysis was performed to determine if the contrast medium type, contrast medium volume, and/or tim

180 This pattern was observed regardless of i.v. contrast medium type, diagnostic criteria for AKI, or wh

181 ubgroups of different patient comorbidities, contrast medium types, and AKI diagnostic criteria.

182 tantial limitations, they shed some light on contrast medium use and safety.

183 Remote ischemic preconditioning before contrast medium use prevents contrast medium-induced acu

184 sment, identification of high-risk patients, contrast medium use, and preventive strategies are discu

185 sment, identification of high-risk patients, contrast medium use, and preventive strategies will be d

186 raphy, but it is unclear whether the type of contrast medium used (oil-based or water-soluble contras

187 Quantities of contrast medium used and contrast-enhanced aortic attenu

188 Altering the viscosity of the barium contrast medium used for defecography does not substanti

189 nt defecography three times with a different contrast medium used for each examination.

190 cantly reduced radiation dose (0.44 mSv) and contrast medium volume (45 mL), thus enabling substantia

191 For each patient, the injected contrast medium volume per body weight index was calcula

192 Mean contrast medium volume was 107 mL +/- 20 (standard devia

193 ed to determine if the contrast medium type, contrast medium volume, and/or time between the initial

194 rm vascular contrast enhancement and reduced contrast medium volume, which are desirable in CT angiog

195 range of patient weights (45.3-153.0 kg) and contrast medium volumes (76-125 mL) were noted.

196 traveling time and may well be explained by contrast medium volumetric inflow and recirculation phys

197 No oral contrast medium was administered.

198 incidence of AKI in patients exposed to i.v. contrast medium was directly compared with the incidence

199 Contrast medium was injected at a flow rate determined t

200 hy with a constant-rate injection: 160 mL of contrast medium was injected for 40 seconds at a constan

201 ally decelerated injection method: 134 mL of contrast medium was injected for 40 seconds, starting at

202 Bronchography with nonionic water-soluble contrast medium was performed initially through an endot

203 ated that 1.2 mL per kilogram body weight of contrast medium was required to achieve 250 HU.

204 Previous reaction to contrast medium was the most important risk factor in pr

205 er filter, which simulated the use of barium contrast medium, was added to increase attenuation.

206 CT contrast medium washout analysis was used to further cha

207 Average age and use of ionic versus nonionic contrast medium were identical in patients with and in t