Preliminary evaluation of hexabrix for temporomandibular joint arthrography

Richard W Katzberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

A double-blind randomized study of ten patients compared Hexabrix 32% to Renografin-60 in TMJ arthrography. Equivalent volumes of contrast materal were injected under fluoroscopic observation, with film quality and patient subjective response graded independently by three radiologists. In immediate arthrogram quality, Hexabrix was rated excellent; Renografin-60 was rated good. For 10-minute radiographs, Hexabrix had a good to excellent rating; Renografin-60 rated fair to good in image quality. Significantly less pain was experienced with Hexabrix.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S387-S388
JournalInvestigative Radiology
Volume19
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1984
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ioxaglic Acid
Arthrography
Temporomandibular Joint
Double-Blind Method
Observation
Pain
urovision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Preliminary evaluation of hexabrix for temporomandibular joint arthrography. / Katzberg, Richard W.

In: Investigative Radiology, Vol. 19, No. 6, 1984, p. S387-S388.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Katzberg, Richard W. / Preliminary evaluation of hexabrix for temporomandibular joint arthrography. In: Investigative Radiology. 1984 ; Vol. 19, No. 6. pp. S387-S388.
@article{ad59d13a69c24651ae69465584709f2a,
title = "Preliminary evaluation of hexabrix for temporomandibular joint arthrography",
abstract = "A double-blind randomized study of ten patients compared Hexabrix 32{\%} to Renografin-60 in TMJ arthrography. Equivalent volumes of contrast materal were injected under fluoroscopic observation, with film quality and patient subjective response graded independently by three radiologists. In immediate arthrogram quality, Hexabrix was rated excellent; Renografin-60 was rated good. For 10-minute radiographs, Hexabrix had a good to excellent rating; Renografin-60 rated fair to good in image quality. Significantly less pain was experienced with Hexabrix.",
author = "Katzberg, {Richard W}",
year = "1984",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "S387--S388",
journal = "Investigative Radiology",
issn = "0020-9996",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Preliminary evaluation of hexabrix for temporomandibular joint arthrography

AU - Katzberg, Richard W

PY - 1984

Y1 - 1984

N2 - A double-blind randomized study of ten patients compared Hexabrix 32% to Renografin-60 in TMJ arthrography. Equivalent volumes of contrast materal were injected under fluoroscopic observation, with film quality and patient subjective response graded independently by three radiologists. In immediate arthrogram quality, Hexabrix was rated excellent; Renografin-60 was rated good. For 10-minute radiographs, Hexabrix had a good to excellent rating; Renografin-60 rated fair to good in image quality. Significantly less pain was experienced with Hexabrix.

AB - A double-blind randomized study of ten patients compared Hexabrix 32% to Renografin-60 in TMJ arthrography. Equivalent volumes of contrast materal were injected under fluoroscopic observation, with film quality and patient subjective response graded independently by three radiologists. In immediate arthrogram quality, Hexabrix was rated excellent; Renografin-60 was rated good. For 10-minute radiographs, Hexabrix had a good to excellent rating; Renografin-60 rated fair to good in image quality. Significantly less pain was experienced with Hexabrix.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0021740869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0021740869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - S387-S388

JO - Investigative Radiology

JF - Investigative Radiology

SN - 0020-9996

IS - 6

ER -