1. Sawiris N, Venizelos A, Ouyang B, Lopes D, Chen M. Current utility of diagnostic catheter cerebral angiography. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;23:e145-e150.
2. Zeitler E, Seyfarth W, Richter EJ, Ritter W, Leonhardi J. The value of angiography in cerebrovascular disease. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1989;37:259-263.
4. Hill JA, Cohen MB, Kou WH, Mancini GB, Mansour M, Fountaine H, et al. Iodixanol, a new isosmotic nonionic contrast agent compared with iohexol in cardiac angiography. Am J Cardiol 1994;74:57-63.
6. Spencer CM, Goa KL. Iodixanol. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and diagnostic use as an x-ray contrast medium. Drugs 1996;52:899-927.
7. Barrett BJ, Katzberg RW, Thomsen HS, Chen N, Sahani D, Soulez G, et al. Contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing computed tomography: a double-blind comparison of iodixanol and iopamidol. Invest Radiol 2006;41:815-821.
9. Solomon R. The role of osmolality in the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy: a systematic review of angiographic contrast media in high risk patients. Kidney Int 2005;68:2256-2263.
16. American College of Radiology (ACR) Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media. ACR manual on contrast media. Version 10.1. ACR; 2015
17. Bird CR, Drayer BP, Velaj R, Triolo PJ, Allen S, Bates M, et al. Safety of contrast media in cerebral angiography: iopamidol vs. methylglucamine iothalamate. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1984;5:801-803.
18. Broadbridge AT, Leslie EV. Cerebral angiographic contrast media; a comparison of hypaque 45% and urografin 60% and an assessment of the relative clinical toxicity of urografin 60%, hypaque 45%, diaginol 25% and diodone 35% in carotid arteriography. Br J Radiol 1958;31:556-560.
19. Broman T, Olsson O. Experimental study of contrast media for cerebral angiography with reference to possible injurious effects on the cerebral blood vessels. Acta radiol 1949;31:321-334.
20. Latchaw RE. The use of nonionic contrast agents in neuroangiography. A review of the literature and recommendations for clinical use. Invest Radiol 1993;28 Suppl 5:S55-S59 discussion S60-S61
21. Fournier PJ, Steinbrich W, Freitag P, Voegeli E. Evaluation of the clinical safety and efficacy of iobitridol (Xenetix) in intravenous urography. Eur J Radiol 1996;23:185-189.
22. Bouard JC, Lyonnet D, Illes JP, Bouard-Monnier C, Rouviere O, Pangaud C. Clinical experience with iobitridol 250-300 in digital subtraction angiography. Double-blind randomized studies vs. iopromide and iohexol. Acta Radiol Suppl 1996;400:85-88.
23. Taylor W, Moseley I. Assessment of the safety and efficacy of iobitridol, an iodinated contrast medium (30% iodine), in cranial CT. Eur J Radiol 1995;20:57-60.
26. Hoogewoud HM, Woessmer B. Iobitridol 300 compared to iopromide 300--a double-blind randomized phase-III study of clinical tolerance in total body CT. Acta Radiol Suppl 1996;400:62-64.
27. Poirier VC, Monsein LH, Newberry PD, Kreps BJ. Double-blind, randomized comparison of iodixanol 320 and iohexol 300 for cerebral angiography. Invest Radiol 1994;29 Suppl 2:S43-S44.
28. Sutton AG, Finn P, Grech ED, Hall JA, Stewart MJ, Davies A, et al. Early and late reactions after the use of iopamidol 340, ioxaglate 320, and iodixanol 320 in cardiac catheterization. Am Heart J 2001;141:677-683.
30. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:543-549.