These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

53 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11189282)

  • 1. [Analysis of registration parameter of the dental radiographs for digital subtraction].
    Zhang G; Ma X; Zhang W
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 1997 Sep; 32(5):265-8. PubMed ID: 11189282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. ROI-based image registration for digital subtraction radiography.
    Yi WJ; Heo MS; Lee SS; Choi SC; Huh KH
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2006 Apr; 101(4):523-9. PubMed ID: 16545718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dental anatomy, radiography, and extraction of mandibular premolar teeth in Yucatan minipigs.
    Eubanks DL
    J Vet Dent; 2013; 30(2):96-8. PubMed ID: 24006719
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A posteriori registration and subtraction of panoramic compared with intraoral radiography.
    Deserno TM; Rangarajan JR; Hoffmann J; Brägger U; Mericske-Stern R; Enkling N
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Aug; 108(2):e39-45. PubMed ID: 19615643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity of a new digital subtraction system: an in vitro study.
    Dove SB; McDavid WD; Hamilton KE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Jun; 89(6):771-6. PubMed ID: 10846136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A precise receptor-positioning device for subtraction radiography, based on cross-arch stabilization.
    Couture RA; Dixon DA; Hildebolt CF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 Jul; 34(4):231-6. PubMed ID: 15961598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Efficacy of a new software in eliminating the angulation errors in digital subtraction radiography.
    Güneri P; Göğüş S; Tuğsel Z; Boyacioğlu H
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):484-9. PubMed ID: 18033945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of manual compared with reference point superimposition on image quality in digital subtraction radiography.
    Wenzel A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1989 Nov; 18(4):145-50. PubMed ID: 2701173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Noise in subtraction images made from pairs of bitewing radiographs: a comparison between two subtraction programs.
    Haiter-Neto F; Wenzel A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 Nov; 34(6):357-61. PubMed ID: 16227479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Determination of the optimal conditions for dental subtraction radiography using a storage phosphor system.
    Brettle DS; Ellwood R; Davies R
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 10202471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy in detecting bone lesions in vitro with conventional and subtracted direct digital imaging.
    Stassinakis A; Brägger U; Stojanovic M; Bürgin W; Lussi A; Lang NP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Nov; 24(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 9161167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Observer-independent registration of perspective projection prior to subtraction of in vivo radiographs.
    Lehmann TM; Gröndahl K; Gröndahl HG; Schmitt W; Spitzer K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 May; 27(3):140-50. PubMed ID: 9693526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessment of apical root resorption using digital reconstruction.
    Reukers E; Sanderink G; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM; van't Hof M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 Jan; 27(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 9482019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quantitative analysis of errors in alveolar crest level caused by discrepant projection geometry in digital subtraction radiography: an in vivo study.
    Huh KH; Lee SS; Jeon IS; Yi WJ; Heo MS; Choi SC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2005 Dec; 100(6):750-5. PubMed ID: 16301158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative analysis of intraoral radiographs with variation of tube angulation to detect insufficient crown margins.
    Sailer BF; Geibel MA
    Int J Comput Dent; 2013; 16(3):201-7. PubMed ID: 24364192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [A positioning device for oral paralleling technique].
    Zhang W; Zhang G; Ma X
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 1997 Jul; 32(4):205-7. PubMed ID: 10680504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automatic noise robust registration of radiographs for subtraction using strategic local correlation: an application to radiographs of dental implants.
    Yi WJ; Heo MS; Lee SS; Choi SC; Lee SB; Huh KH
    Comput Biol Med; 2005 Mar; 35(3):247-58. PubMed ID: 15582631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A digital subtraction radiography scheme based on automatic multiresolution registration.
    Zacharaki EI; Matsopoulos GK; Asvestas PA; Nikita KS; Gröndahl K; Gröndahl HG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Nov; 33(6):379-90. PubMed ID: 15665232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quantitative subtraction with direct digital dental radiography.
    Yoshioka T; Kobayashi C; Suda H; Sasaki T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Sep; 26(5):286-94. PubMed ID: 9482001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Computer-assisted subtraction radiography in periodontal diagnosis.
    Gröndahl K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1987; 50():1-44. PubMed ID: 3321498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.