1Hawkins IF. Carbon dioxide digital subtraction angiography. AJR, 1982, 139:19-24.
2Lu W, Li YH, Chen Y, et al. Carbon dioxide-Digital Subtraction Angiogrphy Features of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. J Vasc Intervent Radiol, 1999, 10 (Suppl 2 part 2):300-301.
2Lang EV, Gossler AA, Fick LJ, et al. Carbon dioxide angiography: effect of injection parameters on bolus configuration. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 1999, 10: 41-49.
3Dlaz LP, Pabon IP, Garcia JA, et al. Assessment of CO2 arteriography in arterial occlusive disease of the lower extremities. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2000, 11: 163-169.
4Liss P, Eklof H, Hellberg O, et al. Renal effects of CO2 and iodinated contrast media in patients undergoing renovascular intervention: a prospective, randomized study. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2005, 16:57-65.
5Heye S, Maleux G, Marchal GJ. Upper-extremity venography: CO2 versus iodinated contrast material. Radiology, 2006, 241: 291-297.
6Brown DB, Pappas JA, Vedantham S, et al. Gadolinium, carbon dioxide, and iodinated contrast material for planning inferior vena cava filter placement: a prospective trial. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2003, 14: 1017-1022.
7Sullivan KL, Bonn J, Shapiro M J, et al. Venography with carbon dioxide as a contrast agent. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 1995, 18: 141-145.
8Moresco KP, Patel N, Johnson MS, et al. Accuracy of CO2 angiography in vessel diameter assessment: a comparative study of CO2 versus iodinated contrast material in an aortoiliac flow model. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2000, 11:437-444.
9Black CM, Lang EV, Kusnick CA, et al. 1996 AUR Memorial Award. Densitometric analysis of eccentric vascular stenoses: comparison of CO2 and iodinated contrast media. Acad Radiol, 1996, 3: 985-993.
10Spinosa DJ, Matsumoto AH, Angle JF, et al. Renal insufficiency: usefulness of gadodiamide-enhanced renal angiography to supplement CO2-enhanced renal angiography for diagnosis and percutaneous treatment. Radiology, 1999, 210: 663-672.
