1. Mould RF. The early history of x-ray diagnosis with emphasis on the contributions of physics 1895–1915. Phys Med Biol. 1995;40(11):1741-1787.

2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Radiation-Emitting Products: Fluoroscopy. Available at https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/medical-x-ray-imaging/fluoroscopy. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

3. Mayo Clinic. CT Scan: Overview. Available at https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/ct-scan/about/pac-20393675. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

4. Mayo Clinic. MRI: Overview. Available at https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/mri/about/pac-20384768. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Archive]. Public Health Advisory: Gadolinium-Containing Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Available at https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170406045321/https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm053112.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

6. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Archive]. Information for Healthcare Professionals: Gadolinium-Containing Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (Marketed as Omniscan, OptiMARK, Magnevist, ProHance, and MultiHance). Available at https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170722191207/https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm142911.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Archive]. Questions and Answers on Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents. Available at https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170406045310/https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm142889.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA Evaluating the Risk of Brain Deposits with Repeated Use of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). Available at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-fda-evaluating-risk-brain-deposits-repeated-use-gadolinium-based. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Archive]. Radiation-Emitting Products: Ultrasound Imaging. Available at https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20171101110117/https://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/MedicalImaging/ucm115357.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

10. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: New Warnings for Using Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents in Patients with Kidney Dysfunction. Available at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-new-warnings-using-gadolinium-based-contrast-agents-patients-kidney. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

11. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA Warns That Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents (GBCAs) Are Retained in the Body; Requires New Class Warnings. Available at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-fda-warns-gadolinium-based-contrast-agents-gbcas-are-retained-body. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

12. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA Identifies No Harmful Effects to Date with Brain Retention of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents for MRIs; Review to Continue. Available at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-fda-identifies-no-harmful-effects-date-brain-retention-gadolinium. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

13. Campbell JD, Elford RW, Brant RF. Case-control study of prenatal ultrasonography exposure in children with delayed speech. CMAJ. 1993;149(10):1435-1440.

14. Salvesen KA. EFSUMB: safety tutorial: epidemiology of diagnostic ultrasound exposure during pregnancy-European committee for medical ultrasound safety (ECMUS). Eur J Ultrasound. 2002;15(3):165-171.

15. Newnham JP, Doherty DA, Kendall GE, Zubrick SR, Landau LL, Stanley FJ. Effects of repeated prenatal ultrasound examinations on childhood outcome up to 8 years of age: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;364(9450):2038-2044.

16. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Avoid Fetal "Keepsake" Images, Heartbeat Monitors. Available at https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/avoid-fetal-keepsake-images-heartbeat-monitors. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

17. Tanne JH. FDA warns against commercial prenatal ultrasound videos. BMJ. 2004;328(7444):853.

18. Vallabhajosula S. Positron emission tomography radiopharmaceuticals for imaging brain Beta-amyloid. Semin Nucl Med. 2011;41(4):283-299.

19. Society of Interventional Radiology. What is Interventional Radiology? Available at https://www.sirweb.org/patient-center/conditions-and-treatments/what-is-interventional-radiology. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

20. Lexicomp Online. Available at https://online.lexi.com. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

21. Daley BJ, Taylor D, Goicolea JFA. Perioperative Anticoagulation Management. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/285265-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

22. Mahnken AH, Wilhelm KE, Ricke J (eds). CT- and MR-Guided Interventions in Radiology. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2013.

23. Siddiqi NH. Contrast Medium Reactions. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/422855-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

24. Maddox TG. Adverse reactions to contrast material: recognition, prevention, and treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2002;66(7):1229-1235.

25. Hunt CH, Hartman RP, Hesley GK. Frequency and severity of adverse effects of iodinated and gadolinium contrast materials: retrospective review of 456,930 doses. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193(4):1124-1127.

26. Lasser EC, Berry CC, Talner LB, et al. Pretreatment with corticosteroids to alleviate reactions to intravenous contrast material.N Engl J Med. 1987;317(14):845-849.

27. Barkin JS, Casal GL, Reiner DK, Goldberg RI, Phillips RS, Kaplan S. A comparative study of contrast agents for endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. Am J Gastroenterol. 1991;86(10):1437-1441.

28. Juels AN, Windle ML. Procedural Sedation. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/109695-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

29. The Joint Commission. Comprehensive Accreditation Manual for Hospitals: The Official Handbook. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: Joint Commission Resources; 2018.

30. The Joint Commission. Standards FAQs: Hospital and Hospital Clinics: Provision of Care, Treatment, and Services (PC): Sedation and Anesthesia: Understanding the Assessment Requirements. Available at https://www.jointcommission.org/standards/standard-faqs/hospital-and-hospital-clinics/provision-of-care-treatment-and-services-pc/000001645/. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

31. American Society of Anesthesiologists. ASA Physical Status Classification System. Available at https://www.asahq.org/resources/clinical-information/asa-physical-status-classification-system. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

32. Aldrete JA. Discharge criteria. Bailliere's Clin Anaesthesiol. 1994;8(4):763-773.

33. Aldrete JA. Modifications to the postanesthesia score for use in ambulatory surgery. J Perianesth Nurs. 1998;13(3):148-155.

34. Levine B (ed). Principles of Forensic Toxicology. 4th ed. Washington, DC: AACC Press; 2013.

35. Olkkola KT, Ahonen J. Midazolam and other benzodiazepines. Handb Ex Pharmacol. 2008;(182):335-360.

36. Society of Interventional Radiology. Patient Center: Glossary of Interventional Radiology Treatments. Available at https://www.sirweb.org/patient-center/conditions-and-treatments/glossary-of-ir-treatments. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

37. Society of Interventional Radiology. ACR-SIR-SPR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Image-Guided Percutaneous Needle Biopsy (PNB). Available at https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/PNB.pdf. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

38. Vilmann P, Larsen SS. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy in the chest: little to lose, much to gain. Eur Respir J. 2005;25(3):400-401.

39. Boskovic T, Stanic J, Pena-Karan S, et al. Pneumothorax after transthoracic needle biopsy of lung lesions under CT guidance.J Thorac Dis. 2014;6(Suppl 1):S99-S107.

40. Cholongitas E, Quaglia A, Samonakis D, et al. Transjugular liver biopsy: how good is it for histological interpretation? Gut. 2006;55(12):1789-1794.

41. Tan KT, Rajan DK, Kachura JR, Hayeems E, Simons ME, Ho CS. Pain after percutaneous liver biopsy for diffuse hepatic disease: a randomized trail comparing subcostal and intercostal approaches. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16(9):1215-1219.

42. Strobel D, Bernatik T, Blank W, et al. Incidence of bleeding in 8172 percutaneous ultrasound-guided intraabdominal diagnostic and therapeutic interventions—results of the prospective multicenter DEGUM interventional ultrasound study (PIUS study). Ultraschall Med. 2015;36(2):122-131.

43. Bihl GR, Petri M, Fine DM. Kidney biopsy in lupus nephritis: look before you leap. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21(7):1749-1752.

44. Brent LW. Lupus Nephritis Workup: Kidney Biopsy. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/330369-workup#c9. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

45. Blake MA, Sweeney AT. Pheochromocytoma. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/124059-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

46. Ahrar K, Himmerich JU, Herzog CE, et al. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided biopsy in the definitive diagnosis of osteosarcoma.J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15(11):1329-1333.

47. Yu SC. The utility of a drainage needle for percutaneous abscess drainage. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185(1):58-63.

48. Rosenberg S, Courtney A, Nemeck AA Jr, Omary RA. Comparison of percutaneous management techniques for recurrent malignant ascites. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15(10):1129-1131.

49. Caldwell J, Edriss H, Nugent K. Chronic peritoneal indwelling catheters for the management of malignant and nonmalignant ascites. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2018;31(3):297-302.

50. Jaffe TA, Nelson RC, DeLong DM, Paulson EK. Practice patterns in percutaneous image-guided intra-abdominal abscess drainage: survey of academic and private centers. Radiology. 2004;233(3):750-756.

51. Gervais DA, Ho CH, O'Neill MJ, Arellano RS, Hahn PF, Mueller PR. Recurrent abdominal and pelvic abscesses: incidence, results of repeated percutaneous drainage, and underlying causes in 956 drainages. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182(2):463-466.

52. de Groof EJ, Carbonnel F, Buskens CJ, Bemelman WA. Abdominal abscess in Crohn's disease: multidisciplinary management.Dig Dis. 2014;32(Suppl 1):103-109.

53. Schildhouse R, Lai A, Barsuk JH, Mourad M, Chopra V. Safe and effective bedside thoracentesis: a review of the evidence for practicing clinicians. J Hosp Med. 2017;12(4):266-276.

54. Redden MD, Chin TY, van Driel ML. Surgical versus non-surgical management for pleural empyema. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;3:CD010651.

55. Visser BC, Muthusamy VR, Yeh BM, Coakley FV, Way LW. Diagnostic evaluation of cystic pancreatic lesions. HPB (Oxford). 2008;10(1):63-69.

56. Pelaez-Luna M, Chari ST. Cyst fluid analysis to diagnose pancreatic cystic lesions: an as yet unfulfilled promise. Gastroenterology. 2006;130(3):1007-1009.

57. Lopes CV. Cyst fluid glucose: an alternative to carcinoembryonic antigen for pancreatic mucinous cysts. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25(19):2271-2278.

58. Faias S, Pereira L, Roque R, et al. Excellent accuracy of glucose level in cystic fluid for diagnosis of pancreatic mucinous cysts.Dig Dis Sci. 2020;65(7):2071-2078.

59. Jabbar KS, Verbeke C, Hyltander AG, Sjövall H, Hansson GC, Sadik R. Proteomic mucin profiling for the identification of cystic precursors of pancreatic cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(2):djt439.

60. Moutinho-Ribeiro P, Macedo G, Melo SA. Pancreatic cancer diagnosis and management: has the time come to prick the bubble? Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;9:779.

61. Morris-Stiff G, Lentz G, Chalikonda S, et al. pancreatic cyst aspiration analysis for cystic neoplasms: mucin or carcinoembryonic antigen—which is better? Surgery. 2010;148(4):638-644.

62. Utomo WK, Braat H, Bruno MJ, et al. Cytopathological analysis of cyst fluid enhances diagnostic accuracy of mucinous pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(24):e988.

63. Kariniemi J, Sequeiros RB, Ojala R, Tervonen O. Feasibility of MR imaging-guided percutaneous drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(8):1321-1326.

64. Wybranski C, Strach K, Krenzien F, et al. Percutaneous abscess drainage using near real-time MR guidance in an open 1.0-T MR scanner: proof of concept. Invest Radiol. 2013;48(6):477-484.

65. Zerem E, Hauser G, Loga-Zec S, Kunosić S, Jovanović P, Crnkić D. Minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic pseudocysts.World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(22):6850-6860.

66. Aboumarzouk OM, Kata SG, Keeley FX, McCliton S, Nabi G. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;5:CD006029.

67. Siddiqi NH. Percutaneous Nephrostomy. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1821504-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

68. Srisubat A, Potisat S, Lojanapiwat B, Setthawong V, Laopaiboon M. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;11:CD007044.

69. Dyer RB, Regan JD, Kavanagh PV, Khatod EG, Chen MY, Zagoria RJ. Percutaneous nephrostomy with extensions of the technique: step by step. Radiographics. 2002;22(3):503-525.

70. Al-Aown A, Kyriazis I, Kallidonis P. Ureteral stents: new ideas, new designs. Ther Adv Urol. 2010;2(2):85-92.

71. Song HY, Park H, Suh TS, et al. Recurrent traumatic urethral strictures near the external sphincter: treatment with covered, retrievable, expandable nitinol stent—initial results. Radiology. 2003;226(2):433-440.

72. Dawood A, Jayaraman V. Percutaneous Cholangiography. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1828033-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

73. Ignee A, Cui X, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and drainage using extravascular contrast enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol. 2015;53(5):385-390.

74. Nolsøe CP, Nolsøe AB, Klubien J, et al. Use of ultrasound contrast agents in relation to percutaneous interventional procedures: a systematic review and pictorial essay. J Ultrasound Med. 2018;37(6):1305-1324.

75. Johnson PL. Biliary Stenting. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1828072-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

76. Burke DR, Lewis CA, Cardella JF, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and biliary drainage. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14(9 Pt 2);S243-S246.

77. Spies JB, Belin L. Complications of femoral artery puncture. Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170(1):9-11.

78. Applegate RJ, Sacrinty MT, Kutcher MA, et al. Trends in vascular complications after diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention via the femoral artery, 1998 to 2007. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1(3):317-326.

79. Nathan S, Rao SV. Radial versus femoral access for percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for vascular complications and bleeding. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2012;14(4):502-509.

80. Mamas MA, Ratib K, Routledge H, et al. Influence of arterial access site selection on outcomes in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: are the results of randomized trials achievable in clinical practice? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(7):698-706.

81. Miller DL. Safety in interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007;18(1):1-3.

82. Machecourt J, Bonnefoy E, Vanzetto G, et al. Primary angioplasty is cost-minimizing compared with pre-hospital thrombolysis for patients within 60 min of a percutaneous coronary intervention center: the Comparison of Angioplasty and Pre-hospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPTIM) cost-efficacy sub-study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(4):515-524.

83. Bittl JA, Chew DP, Topol EJ, Kong DF, Califf RM. Meta-analysis of randomized trials of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus atherectomy, cutting balloon atherotomy, or laser angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(6):936-942.

84. Fernández-Avilés F, Alonso JJ, Peña G, et al. Primary angioplasty vs. early routine post-fibrinolysis angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation: the GRACIA-2 non-inferiority, randomized, controlled trail. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(8):949-960.

85. Pentecost MJ, Criqui MH, Dorros G, et al. Guidelines for peripheral percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity vessels. A statement for health professionals from a Special Writing Group of the Councils on Cardiovascular Radiology, Arteriosclerosis, Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Clinical Cardiology, and Epidemiology and Prevention, the American Heart Association. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14(9 Pt 2):S495-S515.

86. Bountouris I, Kristmundsson T, Dias N, Zdanowski Z, Malina M. Is repeat PTA of a failing hemodialysis fistula durable? Int J Vasc Med. 2014:369687.

87. Miquelin DG, Reis LF, da Silva AA, de Godoy JM. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in the treatment of stenosis of arteriovenous fistulae for hemodialysis. Int Arch Med. 2008;1(1):16.

88. Buccheri D, Piraino D, Andolina G, Cortese B. Understanding and managing in-stent restenosis: a review of clinical data, from pathogenesis to treatment. J Thorac Dis. 2016;8(10):E1150-E1162.

89. Dibra A, Kastrati A, Alfonso F, et al. Effectiveness of drug-eluting stents in patients with bare-metal in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(5):616-623.

90. Alfonso F, Pérez-Vizcayno MJ, Hernandez R, et al. A randomized comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent with balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis: results of the Restenosis Intrastent: Balloon Angioplasty Versus Elective Sirolimus-Eluting Stenting (RIBS-II) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(11):2152-2160.

91. Holmes DR Jr, Teirstein P, Satler L, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents vs. vascular brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis within bare-metal stents: the SISR randomized trial. JAMA. 2006;295(11):1264-1273.

92. Mukherjee D, Moliterno DJ. Brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis: a distant second choice to drug-eluting stent placement. JAMA. 2006;295(11):1307-1309.

93. Alfonso F, Perez-Vizcayno MJ, Hernandez R, et al. Long-term clinical benefit of sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis results of the RIBS-II (Restenosis Intra-stent: Balloon angioplasty vs elective sirolimus-eluting Stenting) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(20):1621-1627.

94. Waksman R, Iantorno M. Refractory in-stent restenosis: improving outcomes by standardizing our approach. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018;20(12):140.

95. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Premarket Approval: BARD E-LUMINEXX Vascular Stent: Labeling. Available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=P080007. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

96. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. LifeStent FlexStar XL Vascular Stent: P070014. Available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf7/P070014a.pdf. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

97. Rogers FB, Mark D, Velmahos G, Rozycki G, Luchette F. Venous thromboembolism: role of vena cava filter in the prophylaxis and treatment of PE. J Trauma. 2002;53(1):142-164.

98. Velmahos GC, Kern J, Chan LS, Oder D, Murray JA, Shekelle P. Prevention of venous thromboembolism after injury: an evidence-based report--part II: analysis of risk factors and evaluation of the role of vena caval filters. J Trauma. 2000;49(1):140-144.

99. Siskin GP, Cho KJ. Inferior Vena Cava Filters. Available at https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/419796-overview. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

100. Kaufman JA, Kinney TB, Streiff MB, et al. Guidelines for the use of retrievable and convertible vena cava filters: report from the Society of Interventional Radiology multidisciplinary consensus conference. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(3):449-459.

101. Stein PD, Matta F, Hugher MJ. Prophylactic inferior vena cava filters in patients with fractures of the pelvis or long bones. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018;9(2):175-180.

102. Duffett L, Carrier M. Inferior vena cava filters. J Thromb Haemost. 2017;15(1):3-12.

103. Endovascular Today. FDA Updates Safety Communication on IVC Filter Retrieval. Available at https://evtoday.com/2014/05/07/fda-updates-safety-communication-on-ivc-filter-retrieval. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

104. Geerts W, Selby R. Inferior vena cava filter use and patient safety: legacy or science? Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2017;2017(1):686-693.

105. Smith TP. Embolization in the external carotid artery. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(12):1897-1912.

106. Dubel GJ, Ahn SH, Soares GM. Transcatheter embolization in the management of epistaxis. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2013;30(3):249-262.

107. Volkers NA, Hehenkamp WJK, Birnie E, et al. Uterine artery embolization in the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroid tumors (EMMY trial): periprocedural results and complications. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(3):471-480.

108. Interventional News. Unilateral UAE Effective for Unilateral Fibroid Disease with Supply from Only One Uterine Artery. Available at https://interventionalnews.com/unilateral-uae-effective-for-unilateral-fibroid-disease-with-supply-from-only-one-uterine-artery. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

109. Tropeano G, Amoroso S, Scambia G. Non-surgical management of uterine fibroids. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14(3):259-274.

110. Gupta JK, Sinha A, Lumsden MA, Hickey M. Uterine artery embolization for symptomatic uterine fibroids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;12:CD005073.

111. Serres-Cousine O, Kujiper FM, Curis E, Atashroo D. Clinical investigation of fertility after uterine artery embolization. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(4):e1-e403.

112. Lavenson GS Jr. The carotid artery ultrasound report: considerations in evaluation and management. J Vascular Ultrasound. 2004;28(1):15-19.

113. Topol EJ, Yadav JS. Recognition of the importance of embolization in artherosclerotic vascular disease. Circulation. 2000;101(5):570-580.

114. Seriki DM, Ashleigh RJ, Butterfield JS, et al. Midterm follow-up of a single-center experience of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with use of the Talent stent-graft. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(6):973-977.

115. D'Elia P, Tyrrell M, Azzaoui R, et al. Zenith abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular graft: a literature review. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2009;50(2):165-170.

116. Torsello G, Osada N, Florek HJ, et al. Long-term outcome after Talent endograft implantation for aneurysms of the abdominal aorta: a multicenter retrospective study. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43(2):277-284.

117. van Keulen JW, de Vries JP, Dekker H, et al. One-year multicenter results of 100 abdominal aortic aneurysm patients treated with the Endurant stent graft. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(3):609-615.

118. Amaoutakis DJ, Zammert M, Karthikesalingam A, Belkin M. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2016;30(3):331-340.

119. Jamieson WR. Advanced technologies for cardiac valvular replacement, transcatheter innovations and reconstructive surgery. Surg Technol Int. 2006;15:149-187.

120. Almeida CL, Chaturvedi R, Lee K-J, et al. Abstract 1932: percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation—the first North American trial. Circulation. 2006;114(18):385.

121. Nordmeyer J, Coats L, Lurz P, et al. Percutaneous pulmonary valve-in-valve implantation: a successful treatment concept for early device failure. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(6):810-815.

122. Cubeddu RJ, Palacios IF. Percutaneous heart valve replacement and repair: advances and future potential. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2009;7(7):811-821.

123. Khambadkone S, Coats L, Taylor A, et al. Percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation in humans: results in 59 consecutive patients. Circulation. 2005;112(8):1189-1197.

124. Lurz P, Coats L, Khambadkone S, et al. Percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation: impact of evolving technology and learning curve on clinical outcome. Circulation. 2008;117(15):1964-1972.

125. Andresen B, Døhlen G, Diep LM, Lindberg H, Fosse E, Andersen MH. Psychosocial and clinical outcomes of percutaneous versus surgical pulmonary valve implantation. Open Heart. 2018;5(1):e000758.

126. de Jaegere PP, Kovac J, Otten AM, et al. Abstract 4512: one-year clinical outcome after percutaneous aortic valve implantation. Circulation. 2008;118:S904.

127. Jung HS, Kalva SP, Greenfield AJ, et al. TIPS: comparison of shunt patency and clinical outcomes between bare stents and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene stent-grafts. J Vasc and Interv Radiol. 2009;20(2):180-185.

128. Wang CM, Li X, Fu J, et al. Construction of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: bare metal stent/stent-graft combination versus single stent-graft, a prospective randomized controlled study with long-term patency and clinical analysis. Chin Med J (Engl). 2016;129(11):1261-1267.

129. Qi XS, Bai M, Yang ZP, Fan DM. Selection of a TIPS stent for management of portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis: an evidence-based review. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(21):6470-6480.

130. Vignalu C, Bargellini, Grosso M, et al. TIPS with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent: results of an Italian multicenter study. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185(2):472-480.

131. Lee JKT, Sagel SS, Stanley RJ, Heiken JP. Computed Body Tomography with MRI Correlation. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006.

132. Rajagopal M, Venkatesan AM. Image fusion and navigation platforms for percutaneous image-guided interventions. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41(4):620-628.

133. Solbiati M, Passera KM, Rotilio A, et al. Augmented reality for interventional oncology: proof-of-concept study of a novel high-end guidance system platform. Eur Radiol Exp. 2018;2:18.

134. Bhattacharji P, Moore W. Application of real-time 3D navigation system in CT-guided percutaneous interventional procedures: a feasibility study. Radiol Res Pract. 2017;3151694.

135. Solbiati M, Ierace T, Muglia R, et al. Thermal ablation of liver tumors guided by augmented reality: an initial clinical experience. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(5):1312.

136. Wood BJ, Locklin JK, Viswanathan A, et al. Technologies for guidance of radiofrequency ablation in the multimodality interventional suite of the future. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007;18(1 Pt 1):9-24.

137. Mahnken AH, Tacke JA, Wildberger JA, Günther RW. Radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteoma: initial results with a bipolar ablation device. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(9):1465-1470.

138. Brace CL. Microwave Ablation Technology Avoids Problems that Plague RFA, Offers Promise for New Applications. Available at https://www.diagnosticimaging.com/articles/microwave-ablation-technology-avoids-problems-plague-rfa-offers-promise-new-applications. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

139. Simon CJ, Dupuy DE, Mayo-Smith WW. Microwave ablation: principles and applications. Radiographics. 2005;25(Suppl 1):S69-S83.

140. Martin RCG, Scoggins CR, McMasters KM. Safety and efficacy of microwave ablation of hepatic tumors: a prospective review of a 5-year experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(1):171-178.

141. Vogl TJ, Roman A, Nour-Eldin NA, Hohenforst-Schmidt W, Bednarova I, Kaltenbach B. A comparison between 915 MHz and 2450 MHz microwave ablation systems for the treatment of small diameter lung metastases. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2018;24(1):31-37.

142. Menon V, Harrington RA, Hichman JS, et al. Thrombolysis and adjunctive therapy in acute myocardial infarction: the seventh ACCP conference on antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy. Chest. 2004;126(3 Suppl):549S-575S.

143. Wardlaw JM, Zoppo G, Yamaguchi T, Berge E. Thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;3:CD000213.

144. Wardlaw JM, Murray V, Berge E, Del Zoppo GJ. Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD000213.

145. Adams H, Adams R, Del Zoppo G, Goldstein LB. Guidelines for the early management of patients with ischemic stroke: 2005 guidelines update: a scientific statement from the Stroke Council of the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2005;36:916-923.

146. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. 2018 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2018;49(3):e46-e110.

147. Wardlaw JM, Murray V, Berge E, Del Zoppo GJ. Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;7:CD000213.

148. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: 2019 update to the 2018 guidelines for the early management of acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2019;50(12):e344-e418.

149. American Society for Health-System Pharmacists. AHFS Drug Information, 2019. Bethesda, MD: American Society for Health-System Pharmacists; 2019.

150. Clark WM, Albers GW, Madden KP, Hamilton S. The rtPA (Alteplase) 0- to 6-hour acute stroke trial, part A (A0276g): results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. Thrombolytic therapy in acute ischemic stroke study investigators. Stroke. 2000;31(4):811-816.

151. Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(13):1317-1329.

152. Wahlgren N, Ahmed N, Dávalos A, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3-4.5 h after acute ischaemic stroke (SITS-ISTR): an observational study. Lancet. 2008;372(9646):1303-1309.

153. Ahmed N, Wahlgren N, Grond M, et al. Implementation and outcome of thrombolysis with alteplase 3-4.5 hours after an acute stroke: an updated analysis from SITS-ISTR. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(9):866-874.

154. U.S. National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov. Efficacy and Safety of Desmoteplase to Treat Acute Ischemic Stroke (DIAS-4). Available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00856661. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

155. Sagonowsky E. Lundbeck Discontinues Further Development of Desmoteplase; 2014 Profit Guidance Range Narrowed. Available at https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/lundbeck-discontinues-further-development-of-desmoteplase-2014-profit-guidance-range. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

156. Reuters. BRIEF: Lundbeck Discontinues Development of Desmoteplase and Narrows 2014 Profit Guidance. Available at https://www.reuters.com/article/hlundbeck-brief-idUSL6N0U209U20141218. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

157. Darcy MD, Cash BD, Feig BW, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria: Radiologic Management of Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Bleeding. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2014.

158. Pancioli AM, Broderick J, Brott T, et al. The combined approach to lysis utilizing eptifibatide and rt-PA in acute ischemic stroke: the CLEAR stroke trial. Stroke. 2008;39(12):3268-3276.

159. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ALARA. Available at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/alara.html. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

160. OECD Data. Computed Tomography Exams. Available at https://data.oecd.org/healthcare/computed-tomography-ct-exams.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

161. Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Johnson E, et al. Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure for patients enrolled in large integrated health care systems, 1996–2010. JAMA. 2012;307(22):400-409.

162. Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB. Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff. 2008;27(6):1491-1502.

163. Scott BR, Sanders CL, Mitchel REJ, Boreham DR. CT scans may reduce rather than increase the risk of cancer. J Am Physicians Surg. 2008;13(1):8-11.

164. McKinsey and Company. Accounting for the Cost of Health Care in the United States. Available at https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare-systems-and-services/our-insights/accounting-for-the-cost-of-health-care-in-the-united-states. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

165. Applegate KE, Amis ES Jr, Schauer DA. Radiation exposure from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(23):2289-2292.

166. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Medical Radiation Exposure of the U.S. Population Greatly Increased Since the Early 1980s. Available at https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090303125809.htm. Last accessed May 12, 2022.

167. America's Health Insurance Plans. Ensuring Quality through Appropriate Use of Diagnostic Imaging. America's Health Insurance Plans; Washington, DC: 2008.

168. Kouri BE, Parsons RG, Alpert HR. Physician self-referral for diagnostic imaging: review of the empiric literature. Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(4):843-850.

169. Hendel RC, Cerqueira M, Douglas PS, et al. A multicenter assessment of the use of single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging with appropriateness criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(2):156-162.

170. Hughes DR, Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH. Imaging self-referral associated with higher costs and limited impact on duration of illness. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010;29(12):2244-2251.

171. Patel MR, Peterson ED, Dai D, et al. Low diagnostic yield of elective coronary angiography. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(10):886-895.

172. Dick JF 3rd, Gallagher TH, Brenner RJ, et al. Predictors of radiologists' perceived risk of malpractice lawsuits in breast imaging.Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(2):327-333.

173. Conklin LS, Bernstein C, Bartholomew L, Oliva-Hemker M. Medical malpractice in gastroenterology. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6(6):677-681.

174. Birbeck GL, Gifford DR, Song J, Belin TR, Mittman BS, Vickrey BG. Do malpractice concerns, payment mechanisms, and attitudes influence test-ordering decisions? Neurology. 2004;62(1):119-121.