ライフサイエンスコーパス: iohexol

1 rement (mGFR) by the plasma disappearance of iohexol.

2 Iodixanol, 8 (16%) to Iomeprol and 4 (8%) to Iohexol.

3 in GFR, measured by the plasma clearance of iohexol.

4 s were injected with 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mL of iohexol.

5 inst induction of pancreatic inflammation by iohexol.

6 They received a similar iodine load with iohexol 300 and were studied with a similar technique.

7 ted contrast material (50% and full-strength iohexol 300).

8 omography (CT) of the abdomen with 100 mL of iohexol (300 mg iodine per milliliter, Omnipaque; GE Hea

9 A 150-mL dose of iohexol (300 mg of iodine per milliliter) (Omnipaque; Ny

10 dual-contrast-enhanced CT (triglyceride plus iohexol [425 mg I/kg]).

11 logram of body weight [mg I/kg]), CTAP (with iohexol [600 mg I/kg]), triglyceride-enhanced CT (126 mg

12 tion rate (GFR) was directly measured (using iohexol) along with 12 markers of inflammation in Multic

13 GFR measured by the plasma disappearance of iohexol among 391 participants in the Chronic Kidney Dis

14 bitridol, 4 (9.5%) to Ioxaglate, 3 (7.1%) to Iohexol and 1 (2.4%) to Iopramide.

15 A total of 539 patients (258 receiving iohexol and 281 not receiving contrast material) were en

16 particles, prepared through cross-linking of iohexol and hexamethylene diisocyanate followed by copre

17 d with 1.5 mL per kilogram of body weight of iohexol and imaged between 2.5 and 10 minutes after inje

18 rved in 37 (14.3%) of 258 subjects receiving iohexol and in seven (2.5%) of 281 subjects in the contr

19 equilibrium CT protocol was developed using iohexol at 300 mg of iodine per milliliter (bolus of 1 m

20 re at 0.625 and 1.25 mmol/L of gadolinium in iohexol at both magnet strengths.

21 ermined by measuring the plasma clearance of iohexol) between the baseline value and the last availab

22 All patients had iohexol clearance to measure GFR at evaluation under sta

23 Using arterial tonometry, iohexol clearance, and magnetic resonance imaging, we re

24 nd GFR, determined by measurement of urinary iohexol clearance, measured 2 weeks after Tx.

25 rance of iothalamate and plasma clearance of iohexol compared with inulin clearance.

26 Animals underwent nonenhanced, iohexol-enhanced (600 mg of iodine per kilogram of body

27 five helical CT examinations: unenhanced CT, iohexol-enhanced CT (600 mg iodine per kilogram of body

28 ual-contrast-enhanced CT (112.4 HU +/- 1.2), iohexol-enhanced CT (97.9 HU +/- 2.2), triglyceride-enha

29 nhanced CT was significantly greater than at iohexol-enhanced CT (P < .05), and attenuation differenc

30 trast-enhanced CT were greater than those at iohexol-enhanced CT or at CTAP (P < .05).

31 ively improved liver lesion detection versus iohexol-enhanced CT.

32 for ITG-dual-enhanced scans as compared with iohexol-enhanced scans (P: <.01).

33 demonstrated similar liver opacification to iohexol-enhanced scans obtained with 600 mg of iodine pe

34 quations in 187 former kidney donors against iohexol GFR for measuring GFR.

35 < or =1.5 mg/dl were compared with standard iohexol GFR values.

36 most precise at 0.41, and were within 30% of iohexol GFR, 89.3 and 96% of the time, respectively.

37 Median iohexol-GFR (iGFR) was 41.3 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (interq

38 nstrated identical concentrations of Na+ and iohexol in ureteral effluent (UE) compared with circulat

39 y contrast media (ICM) iopamidol, iopromide, iohexol, iomeprol, and diatrizoate was examined in purif

40 four low-osmolar contrast media (ioxaglate, iohexol, iopamidol, and ioversol) were compared.

41 fferent CM (iobitridol, iomeprol, iodixanol, iohexol, ioversol, iopramide and ioxaglate).

42 lar, iodinated intravenous products, such as iohexol, is unlikely to have a clinically important effe

43 ar cells, but not HEK293 or COS7 cells, with iohexol led to a peak and then plateau in Ca(2+) signali

44 s GFR as measured by plasma disappearance of iohexol, likely a result of a change in methods used to

45 ntional small-molecule contrast agents, poly(iohexol) nanoparticles exhibited substantially protracte

46 Biocompatible poly(iohexol) nanoparticles, prepared through cross-linking o

47 fter intravenous administration of 120 mL of iohexol (Omnipaque 350; GE Healthcare, Princeton, NJ) in

48 uman acinar cells to the radiocontrast agent iohexol (Omnipaque; GE Healthcare, Princeton, NJ) and me

49 ith 150 mL of intravenous contrast material (iohexol, Omnipaque; Amersham Healthcare, Cork, Ireland)

50 re greater with lower iodine doses than with iohexol or at CTAP.

51 contrast material (59 who underwent CT with iohexol or iodixanol and 81 who underwent MR imaging wit

52 , 150 mL of 60% iodinated contrast material (iohexol or iothalamate meglumine) was injected at either

53 ured either via exogenous markers (eg, DTPA, iohexol), or estimated using equations.

54 Iohexol plasma clearance measurement as gold standard.

55 tatin c-based formulas with a gold standard (iohexol plasma clearance) in 193 renal transplant recipi

56 Primary outcome was measured GFR (iohexol plasma clearance).

57 Dilution of gadolinium into iohexol reduced the signal intensity in all samples comp

58 triglyceride (especially when combined with iohexol), sensitivity values and liver-to-lesion attenua

59 is diluted into a 50% or greater strength of iohexol, the signal intensity curve shifts so that the m

60 he plasma clearance of the endogenous marker iohexol, to compare performance of existing equations of

61 t of urine from neonates who did not receive iohexol was 5.6 HU +/- 3.9, and that from neonates witho

62 m 22 neonates were obtained 8-12 hours after iohexol was administered enterally.

63 ecrotizing enterocolitis who did not receive iohexol was collected.

64 In all examinations, iohexol was used as the contrast agent.

65 gested nonionic iodinated contrast material (iohexol) with a concentration of 300 mg per milliliter w