AJR Get Involved! Join ARRS Today
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MACHT, S. H.
Right arrow Articles by LAWRENCE, P. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by MACHT, S. H.
Right arrow Articles by LAWRENCE, P. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 98, 79-87, Copyright © 1966 by American Roentgen Ray Society

STUDY OF 3 CONTRAST AGENTS IN 2,234 INTRAVENOUS PYELOGRAPHIES

STANLEY H. MACHT M.D.1, RALPH H. WILLIAMS M.D.1, and PHILIP S. LAWRENCE D.Sc.2

1 From the Department of Radiology, Washington County Hospital, Hagerstown, Maryland
2 Chief, Division of Health Interview Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, U.S.P.H.S.

The results of a study of 2,234 unselected patients undergoing intravenous pyelographies, employing 3 commonly used contrast agents are reported.

Observations were recorded as to the quality of the pyelograms obtained and the side effects noted in the patients. The data were analyzed with respect to age, sex and general disease group for the study population as a whole, and with respect to the types of contrast agents employed.

The choice of contrast agent should ideally be individualized according to the age, sex and disease group of the patient in order to obtain a high probability of complete visualization of the urinary tract with low probability of adverse side effects. Such a procedure would be indicated if there were gross divergencies of results from the contrast agents among different age-sex-disease categories of patients, or it might be indicated for a radiographic office or department which has high proportions of children or of elderly patients. However, in the usual busy general hospital radiology department, it is impractical to stock several agents and tailor their use to an advance assessment of individual patient characteristics. The choice is to be made, therefore, on the basis of the agent which gives the best concentration and the fewest side effects in the greatest number of patients regardless of age, sex, or disease category. The authors feel that their preference of the contrast media for intravenous pyelography would be: first, renografin; second, conray-400; and third, hypaque. The data presented in this report may provide some guides for selection of a contrast agent in relation to the type of radiology department or office in which it is to be used.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1966 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.