Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Kontrastmittelbedingte Nebenwirkungen in der Computertomographie

  • Conference paper
Book cover Röntgenkontrastmittel

  • 15 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Wesentliches Merkmal der heute überall verfügbaren CT ist die Darstellung der Weichteile aufgrund des hohen Dichteauflösungsvermögens. Basierend auf dieser Eigenschaft ist in der CT die Distribution von applizierten Kontrastmitteln (KM) innerhalb der Kompartimente des menschlichen Körpers sensitiv darstellbar. Zur Erkennung und weiteren Spezifizierung unterschiedlichster Krankheitsbilder werden deshalb KM in der CT in großem Umfang eingesetzt. Ungeachtet der Applikation von oralen, hepatobiliären und intrakavitären (CT-Arthrographie, CT-Myelographie) KM, wird sich in den nachfolgenden Ausführungen auf die nephrotropen KM beschränkt.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Burgener FA, Hamlin DJ (1981) Contrast enhancement in abdominal CT: bolus vs. infusion. AJR 137: 351

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Claussen CD, Banzer D, Pfretzschner C, Kalender WA, Schörner W (1984) Bolus geometry and dynamics after intravenous contrast medium injection. Radiology 153: 365

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hagman LA, Evans RA, Fahr LM, Hinick VA (1980) Renal consequences of rapid high dose contrast CT. AJR 134: 553

    Google Scholar 

  4. Heiken JP, Weyman PJ, Lee JKT, Balfe DM, Picus D, Brunt EM, Flye MW (1989) Detection of focal hepatic masses: prospective evaluation with CT, delayed CT, CT during arterial portography, and MR imaging. Radiology 171: 47

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Katayama H, Yamaguchi K, Takashima T, Matsuura K, Kozuka T, Seez P: Adverse reactions to contrast media: ionic CM versus non-ionic CM. The Japanese Committee on Safety of Contrast Media

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mattrey RF, Long DM, Peck WW, Slutsky RA, Higgins B (1984) Perfluorocytylbromide as a blood pool contrast agent for liver, spleen and vascular imaging in computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 8: 739

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. McCarthy S, Moss AA (1984) The use of a flow rate injector for contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Radiology 151: 800

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McClennan BL (1987) Low osmolality contrast media: premises and promises. Radiology 162: 1

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Papahadjopoulos D (1979) Liposomes as drug carrier. Ann Rep Med Chem 14: 250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schild H, Mildenberger P, Schweden F et al. (1987) Leber-CT mit portal-venöser Kontrastmittelgabe. Fortschr Röntgenstr 147: 623

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Speck U, Mützel W, Weinmann HJ (1983) Chemistry, physicochemistry and pharmacology of known and new contrast media for angiography, urography and CT enhancement. In: Taenzer V, Zeitler E (eds) Contrast media in urography, angiography and computerized tomography. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 2–10

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sugarbaker PH, Vermess M, Doppman JL, Miller DL, Simon R (1984) Improved detection of focal lesions with computed tomographic examination of the liver using ethiodized oil emulsion (EOE-13) liver contrast. Cancer 54: 1489

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Vermess M, Adamson RH, Doppman JL, Girton M (1977) Computed tomographic demonstration of hepatic tumor with the aid of intravenous iodinated fat emulsion. Radiology 125: 711

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Weinmann HJ, Felsenberg D, Müller H, Press WR, Römer T (1988) Kontrastmittel für die Computertomographie: Status und Zukunft. In: Claussen C, Felix R (Hrsg) Quo Vadis CT? Springer Berlin Heidelberg, New York Tokyo, S 367–377

    Google Scholar 

  15. Young SW, Noon MA, Nassi M, Castellino RA (1980) Dynamic computed tomography body scanning. J Comput Assist Tomogr 4: 168

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. C. D. Claussen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Huppert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Klinische Radiologie, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Albert-Schweitzer-Straße 33, W-4400, Münster, Bundesrepublik Deutschland

    P. E. Peters

  2. Radiologisches Zentrum, Klinikum Nürnberg, Flurstraße 17, W-8500, Nürnberg, Bundesrepublik Deutschland

    E. Zeitler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Claussen, C.D., Schmitt, R., Huppert, P. (1991). Kontrastmittelbedingte Nebenwirkungen in der Computertomographie. In: Peters, P.E., Zeitler, E. (eds) Röntgenkontrastmittel. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-76338-0_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-76338-0_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-53550-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-76338-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation