Iopodic Acid

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 3 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Nelson Ramírez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Diagnosing bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Jorge A. Soto, Óscar Álvarez, Felipe Munera, Sol M. Velez, Joaquín Valencia, Nelson Ramírez
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE. In this investigation we compared the diagnostic performance of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast—enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty-one patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography of suspected biliary stones were studied with unenhanced helical CT, MR cholangiography, and helical CT performed after oral administration of a cholangiographic contrast agent (Iopodic Acid). The studies were randomized for interpretation. Two radiologists evaluated the images by consensus and determined the presence and location of stones. We used retrograde cholangiography findings as the standard of reference. Sensitivity and specificity (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of the three examinations were calculated and compared using the exact form of the McNemar test.RESULTS. Bile duct stones were revealed with retrograde cholangiography in 26 patients (51%). Sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 44.4-82%) for unenha...

Jorge A. Soto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Diagnosing bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Jorge A. Soto, Óscar Álvarez, Felipe Munera, Sol M. Velez, Joaquín Valencia, Nelson Ramírez
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE. In this investigation we compared the diagnostic performance of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast—enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty-one patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography of suspected biliary stones were studied with unenhanced helical CT, MR cholangiography, and helical CT performed after oral administration of a cholangiographic contrast agent (Iopodic Acid). The studies were randomized for interpretation. Two radiologists evaluated the images by consensus and determined the presence and location of stones. We used retrograde cholangiography findings as the standard of reference. Sensitivity and specificity (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of the three examinations were calculated and compared using the exact form of the McNemar test.RESULTS. Bile duct stones were revealed with retrograde cholangiography in 26 patients (51%). Sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 44.4-82%) for unenha...

Óscar Álvarez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Diagnosing bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Jorge A. Soto, Óscar Álvarez, Felipe Munera, Sol M. Velez, Joaquín Valencia, Nelson Ramírez
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE. In this investigation we compared the diagnostic performance of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast—enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty-one patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography of suspected biliary stones were studied with unenhanced helical CT, MR cholangiography, and helical CT performed after oral administration of a cholangiographic contrast agent (Iopodic Acid). The studies were randomized for interpretation. Two radiologists evaluated the images by consensus and determined the presence and location of stones. We used retrograde cholangiography findings as the standard of reference. Sensitivity and specificity (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of the three examinations were calculated and compared using the exact form of the McNemar test.RESULTS. Bile duct stones were revealed with retrograde cholangiography in 26 patients (51%). Sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 44.4-82%) for unenha...

Felipe Munera - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Diagnosing bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Jorge A. Soto, Óscar Álvarez, Felipe Munera, Sol M. Velez, Joaquín Valencia, Nelson Ramírez
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE. In this investigation we compared the diagnostic performance of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast—enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty-one patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography of suspected biliary stones were studied with unenhanced helical CT, MR cholangiography, and helical CT performed after oral administration of a cholangiographic contrast agent (Iopodic Acid). The studies were randomized for interpretation. Two radiologists evaluated the images by consensus and determined the presence and location of stones. We used retrograde cholangiography findings as the standard of reference. Sensitivity and specificity (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of the three examinations were calculated and compared using the exact form of the McNemar test.RESULTS. Bile duct stones were revealed with retrograde cholangiography in 26 patients (51%). Sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 44.4-82%) for unenha...

Sol M. Velez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Diagnosing bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2000
    Co-Authors: Jorge A. Soto, Óscar Álvarez, Felipe Munera, Sol M. Velez, Joaquín Valencia, Nelson Ramírez
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE. In this investigation we compared the diagnostic performance of unenhanced helical CT, oral contrast—enhanced CT cholangiography, and MR cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty-one patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography of suspected biliary stones were studied with unenhanced helical CT, MR cholangiography, and helical CT performed after oral administration of a cholangiographic contrast agent (Iopodic Acid). The studies were randomized for interpretation. Two radiologists evaluated the images by consensus and determined the presence and location of stones. We used retrograde cholangiography findings as the standard of reference. Sensitivity and specificity (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of the three examinations were calculated and compared using the exact form of the McNemar test.RESULTS. Bile duct stones were revealed with retrograde cholangiography in 26 patients (51%). Sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 44.4-82%) for unenha...