• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

用于头颅CT的低渗性对比剂优化:两种对比剂的剂量比较

Optimization of low-osmolality contrast media for cranial CT: a dose comparison of two contrast agents.

作者信息

Kuhn M J, Baker M R

机构信息

Department of Radiology, St. John's Hospital, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield 62769.

出版信息

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1990 Sep-Oct;11(5):847-9; discussion 850-1.

PMID:2120986
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8334094/
Abstract

A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparative study of 200 patients was made to examine the image quality, safety, and costs of 100 ml of ioversol-320 (32 g iodine) and 150 ml of iohexol-300 (45 g iodine) in patients undergoing cranial CT. We found no statistically significant difference in image quality between the two low-osmolality, nonionic contrast agents at these doses. There was a statistically significant (p = .02) difference in the occurrence of minor to mild adverse effects caused by ioversol (n = 0) as compared with iohexol (n = 5). No patient in either group experienced any major contrast-induced reactions. Contrast media costs were 34% less in patients receiving 32 g of iodine as compared with those receiving 45 g of iodine. This study demonstrates that high-quality cranial CT scans are possible even with a reduced volume of low-osmolality contrast medium, and that the potential cost savings are significant.

摘要

对200例患者进行了一项前瞻性、随机、双盲对照研究,以检查100ml碘海醇-320(32g碘)和150ml碘克沙醇-300(45g碘)用于颅脑CT检查时的图像质量、安全性及成本。我们发现,在这些剂量下,两种低渗非离子型对比剂的图像质量无统计学显著差异。碘海醇(n = 0)与碘克沙醇(n = 5)相比,在轻微至轻度不良反应的发生率上存在统计学显著差异(p = 0.02)。两组均无患者发生任何严重的对比剂诱发反应。接受32g碘的患者与接受45g碘的患者相比,对比剂成本降低了34%。本研究表明,即使减少低渗对比剂的用量,高质量的颅脑CT扫描也是可行的,且潜在的成本节约显著。

相似文献

1
Optimization of low-osmolality contrast media for cranial CT: a dose comparison of two contrast agents.用于头颅CT的低渗性对比剂优化:两种对比剂的剂量比较
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1990 Sep-Oct;11(5):847-9; discussion 850-1.
2
Low-osmolality contrast media: dosage comparison of ioversol and iohexol for cranial computed tomography.低渗性对比剂:碘海醇与碘克沙醇用于头颅计算机断层扫描的剂量比较
Comput Med Imaging Graph. 1991 Nov-Dec;15(6):403-6. doi: 10.1016/0895-6111(91)90166-s.
3
Nonionic contrast media in pediatric CT. A comparative study of intravenous use of iopentol and iohexol.
Acta Radiol. 1994 Mar;35(2):186-90.
4
Ioversol for intravenous urography: a comparison study.用于静脉肾盂造影的碘海醇:一项对比研究。
Urol Radiol. 1990;12(1):56-60. doi: 10.1007/BF02923968.
5
Renal effects of nonionic contrast media after intravenous cardiac, and lumbar aortic injections.静脉注射心脏造影剂和腰主动脉造影剂后非离子型造影剂对肾脏的影响。
Invest Radiol. 1990 Sep;25 Suppl 1:S135-6. doi: 10.1097/00004424-199009001-00062.
6
Effect of intravenous low-osmolality iodinated contrast media on patients with myasthenia gravis.静脉注射低渗碘对比剂对重症肌无力患者的影响。
Radiology. 2013 Jun;267(3):727-34. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12121508. Epub 2013 Jan 29.
7
Comparison of iodixanol and iohexol in patients undergoing intravenous pyelography: a prospective controlled study.碘克沙醇与碘海醇在静脉肾盂造影患者中的比较:一项前瞻性对照研究。
Ren Fail. 2009;31(3):181-8. doi: 10.1080/08860220802669636.
8
[Double-blind randomized study comparing ioversol 300 versus iopromide 300 abdominal computed tomography (CT scanner)].[碘海醇300与碘普罗胺300腹部计算机断层扫描(CT扫描仪)的双盲随机对照研究]
Ann Radiol (Paris). 1992;35(4 Pt 2):273-5.
9
Incidences of acute kidney injury, dialysis, and graft loss following intravenous administration of low-osmolality iodinated contrast in patients with kidney transplants.肾移植患者静脉注射低渗碘造影剂后急性肾损伤、透析和移植物丢失的发生率。
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016 Nov;41(11):2182-2186. doi: 10.1007/s00261-016-0827-3.
10
Clinical and nephrologic tolerance of iopromide and iotrolan in computed tomography.
Invest Radiol. 1991 Nov;26 Suppl 1:S83-5; discussion S88-91. doi: 10.1097/00004424-199111001-00027.