BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Attenberger UI, Runge VM, Morelli JN, Williams J, Jackson CB, Michaely HJ. Evaluation of gadobutrol, a macrocyclic, nonionic gadolinium chelate in a brain glioma model: comparison with gadoterate meglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine at 1.5 T, combined with an assessment of field strength dependence, specifically 1.5 versus 3 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:549-55. [PMID: 20187196 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22089] [Cited by in Crossref: 22] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Renz DM, Durmus T, Böttcher J, Taupitz M, Diekmann F, Huppertz A, Pfeil A, Maurer MH, Streitparth F, Bick U, Hamm B, Fallenberg EM. Comparison of Gadoteric Acid and Gadobutrol for Detection as Well as Morphologic and Dynamic Characterization of Lesions on Breast Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging: . Investigative Radiology 2014;49:474-84. [DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000039] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Pfefferbaum A, Rohlfing T, Rosenbloom MJ, Sullivan EV. Combining atlas-based parcellation of regional brain data acquired across scanners at 1.5 T and 3.0 T field strengths. Neuroimage 2012;60:940-51. [PMID: 22297204 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.092] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Hoelter P, Lang S, Weibart M, Schmidt M, Knott MFX, Engelhorn T, Essig M, Kloska S, Doerfler A. Prospective intraindividual comparison of gadoterate and gadobutrol for cervical and intracranial contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Neuroradiology 2017;59:1233-9. [PMID: 28913611 DOI: 10.1007/s00234-017-1922-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Morelli JN, Gerdes CM, Schmitt P, Ai T, Saettele MR, Runge VM, Attenberger UI. Technical considerations in MR angiography: An image-based guide. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37:1326-41. [DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24174] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Morelli JN, Ai F, Runge VM, Zhang W, Li X, Schmitt P, McNeal G, Michaely HJ, Schoenberg SO, Miller M, Gerdes CM, Sincleair ST, Spratt H, Attenberger UI. Time-resolved MR angiography of renal artery stenosis in a swine model at 3 Tesla using gadobutrol with digital subtraction angiography correlation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:704-13. [PMID: 22645046 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23696] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Tsai YF, Yang JS, Tsai FJ, Lu CC, Chiu YJ, Tsai SC. In Vitro Toxicological Assessment of Gadodiamide in Normal Brain SVG P12 Cells. In Vivo 2021;35:2621-30. [PMID: 34410949 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12544] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Escribano F, Sentís M, Oliva JC, Tortajada L, Villajos M, Martín A, Ganau S. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Comparison of gadobutrol vs. Gd-DTPA. Radiologia (Engl Ed) 2018;60:49-56. [PMID: 29217300 DOI: 10.1016/j.rx.2017.10.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Le Duc G, Roux S, Paruta-Tuarez A, Dufort S, Brauer E, Marais A, Truillet C, Sancey L, Perriat P, Lux F, Tillement O. Advantages of gadolinium based ultrasmall nanoparticles vs molecular gadolinium chelates for radiotherapy guided by MRI for glioma treatment. Cancer Nanotechnol 2014;5:4. [PMID: 26561512 DOI: 10.1186/s12645-014-0004-8] [Cited by in Crossref: 64] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 63] [Article Influence: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Morelli JN, Gerdes CM, Zhang W, Williams JM, Saettele MR, Ai F. Enhancement in a brain glioma model: A comparison of half-dose gadobenate dimeglumine versus full-dose gadopentetate dimeglumine at 1.5 and 3 T: Half-Dose Gadobenate Dimeglumine Brain Imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;38:306-11. [DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23965] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Khan R. MRI Contrast Agents: Evolution of Clinical Practice and Dose Optimization. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2016;25:157-61. [PMID: 27367313 DOI: 10.1097/RMR.0000000000000093] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Anzalone N, Scarabino T, Venturi C, Cristaudo C, Tartaro A, Scotti G, Zimatore D, Floris R, Carriero A, Longo M, Cirillo M, Cova MA, Gatti S, Voth M, Colosimo C. Cerebral neoplastic enhancing lesions: multicenter, randomized, crossover intraindividual comparison between gadobutrol (1.0M) and gadoterate meglumine (0.5M) at 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight in a clinical setting. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:139-45. [PMID: 21890295 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.07.005] [Cited by in Crossref: 32] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Bhargava R, Hahn G, Hirsch W, Kim MJ, Mentzel HJ, Olsen OE, Stokland E, Triulzi F, Vazquez E. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients: review and recommendations for current practice. Magn Reson Insights 2013;6:95-111. [PMID: 25114547 DOI: 10.4137/MRI.S12561] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Park JE, Kim JY, Kim HS, Shim WH. Comparison of Dynamic Contrast-Enhancement Parameters between Gadobutrol and Gadoterate Meglumine in Posttreatment Glioma: A Prospective Intraindividual Study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2020;41:2041-8. [PMID: 33060100 DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6792] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Lee CH, Vellayappan B, Taupitz M, Hamm B, Asbach P. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the prostate: intraindividual comparison of gadoterate meglumine and gadobutrol. Eur Radiol 2019;29:6982-90. [PMID: 31264013 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06321-6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Morelli JN, Runge VM, Ai F, Zhang W, Li X, Schmitt P, McNeal G, Miller M, Lennox M, Wusten O, Schoenberg SO, Attenberger UI. Magnetic resonance evaluation of renal artery stenosis in a swine model: performance of low-dose gadobutrol versus gadoterate meglumine in comparison with digital subtraction intra-arterial catheter angiography. Invest Radiol 2012;47:376-82. [PMID: 22543971 DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182539554] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Wuesten O, Morelli JN, Miller MW, Tuzun E, Lenox MW, Fossum TW, Trelles M, Cotes C, Krombach GA, Runge VM. MR angiography of carotid artery aneurysms in a porcine model at 3 Tesla: comparison of two different macrocyclic gadolinium chelates and of dynamic and conventional techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36:1203-12. [PMID: 22826184 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23757] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Essig M, Anzalone N, Combs SE, Dörfler À, Lee SK, Picozzi P, Rovira A, Weller M, Law M. MR imaging of neoplastic central nervous system lesions: review and recommendations for current practice. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:803-17. [PMID: 22016411 DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2640] [Cited by in Crossref: 66] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 29] [Article Influence: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Fallenberg EM, Renz DM, Karle B, Schwenke C, Ingod-Heppner B, Reles A, Engelken FJ, Huppertz A, Hamm B, Taupitz M. Intraindividual, randomized comparison of the macrocyclic contrast agents gadobutrol and gadoterate meglumine in breast magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2015;25:837-49. [PMID: 25249313 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3426-0] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Anzalone N, Essig M, Lee SK, Dörfler A, Ganslandt O, Combs SE, Picozzi P. Optimizing contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging characterization of brain metastases: relevance to stereotactic radiosurgery. Neurosurgery 2013;72:691-701. [PMID: 23381488 DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182889ddf] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]