9. D alrymple NC, Verga M, Anderson KR, Bove P, Covey AM, Rosenfield AT, Smith RC. The value of
unenhanced helical computerized tomography in the management of acute flank pain. J Urol 1998
Mar;159(3):735-40.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9474137
10. Worster A, Preyra I, Weaver B, Haines T. The accuracy of noncontrast helical computed
tomography versus intravenous pyelography in the diagnosis of suspected acute urolithiasis: a
meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2002 Sep;40(3):280-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12192351
11. Shine S. Urinary calculus: IVU vs CT renal stone? A critically appraised topic. Abdom Imaging
2008 Jan- Feb;33(1):41-3.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17786506
12. Mindelzun RE, Jeffrey RB. Unenhanced helical CT evaluating acute abdominal pain: a little
more cost, a lot more information. Radiology 1997 Oct;205(1):43-5.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9314959
13. Shinokara K. Editorial: Choosing imaging modality in 2003. J Urol 2003 Sep;170(3):803.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12913702
14. Morcos SK, Thomsen HS, Webb JA; Contrast Media Safety Committee of the European Society
of Urogenital Radiolology. Prevention of generalized reactions to contrast media: a consensus
report and guidelines. Eur Radiol 2001;11(9):1720-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11511894
15. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK. Contrast media and the kidney: European Society of Urogenital
Radiology (ESUR) guidelines. Br J Radiol 2003 Aug;76(908):513-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12893691
16. N awaz S, Cleveland T, Gaines PA, Chan P. Clinical risk associated with contrast angiography in
metformin treated patients: a clinical review. Clin Radiol 1998 May;53(5):342-4.