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 *

304 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11280366)

  • 1. The radiographic assessment of implant patients: decision-making criteria.
    Dula K; Mini R; van der Stelt PF; Buser D
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(1):80-9. PubMed ID: 11280366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Radiographic modalities for diagnosis and treatment planning in implant dentistry.
    Garg AK; Vicari A
    Implant Soc; 1995; 5(5):7-11. PubMed ID: 9571835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of patient dose from imaging protocols for dental implant planning using conventional radiography and computed tomography.
    Lecomber AR; Yoneyama Y; Lovelock DJ; Hosoi T; Adams AM
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Sep; 30(5):255-9. PubMed ID: 11571544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Must radiation dose for CT of the maxilla and mandible be higher than that for conventional panoramic radiography?
    Diederichs CG; Engelke WG; Richter B; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW
    AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 1996 Oct; 17(9):1758-60. PubMed ID: 8896633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A survey of radiographic prescription in dental implant assessment.
    Sakakura CE; Morais JA; Loffredo LC; Scaf G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Nov; 32(6):397-400. PubMed ID: 15070843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The use of computerized tomography for diagnosis and treatment planning in implant dentistry.
    Iplikçioğlu H; Akça K; Cehreli MC
    J Oral Implantol; 2002; 28(1):29-36. PubMed ID: 12498461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Panoramic radiography in dental diagnostics.
    Molander B
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1996; 119():1-26. PubMed ID: 8971997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Radiation doses in examination of lower third molars with computed tomography and conventional radiography.
    Ohman A; Kull L; Andersson J; Flygare L
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Dec; 37(8):445-52. PubMed ID: 19033429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of the diagnostic advantages of panoramic radiography and computed tomography scanning for placement of root form dental implants.
    Reddy MS; Mayfield-Donahoo T; Vanderven FJ; Jeffcoat MK
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 1994 Dec; 5(4):229-38. PubMed ID: 7640337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparative study between currently used methods and Small Volume-Cone Beam Tomography for surgical placement of mini implants.
    Landin M; Jadhav A; Yadav S; Tadinada A
    Angle Orthod; 2015 May; 85(3):446-53. PubMed ID: 25343688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Calibration of radiographs by a reference metal ball affects preoperative selection of implant size.
    Schropp L; Stavropoulos A; Gotfredsen E; Wenzel A
    Clin Oral Investig; 2009 Dec; 13(4):375-81. PubMed ID: 19221809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effective dose and risk assessment from film tomography used for dental implant diagnostics.
    Frederiksen NL; Benson BW; Sokolowski TW
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1994 Aug; 23(3):123-7. PubMed ID: 7835511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of radiation levels from computed tomography and conventional dental radiographs.
    Ngan DC; Kharbanda OP; Geenty JP; Darendeliler MA
    Aust Orthod J; 2003 Nov; 19(2):67-75. PubMed ID: 14703331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. E.A.O. guidelines fo the use of diagnostic imaging in implant dentistry. A consensus workshop organized by the European Association for Osseointegration in Trinity College Dublin.
    Harris D; Buser D; Dula K; Grondahl K; Haris D; Jacobs R; Lekholm U; Nakielny R; van Steenberghe D; van der Stelt P;
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2002 Oct; 13(5):566-70. PubMed ID: 12674118
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of dose reduction in digital dental panoramic radiography on image quality.
    Dannewitz B; Hassfeld S; Eickholz P; Mühling J
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jan; 31(1):50-5. PubMed ID: 11803389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Implant radiography.
    Friedland B
    J Mass Dent Soc; 2003; 51(4):14-7. PubMed ID: 12677638
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Three-dimensional computer tomography (CT) in the evaluation of placement for dental implants.
    Lee CY
    Hawaii Dent J; 1996; 27(3):26-9. PubMed ID: 11908285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Conventional spiral and low-dose computed mandibular tomography for dental implant planning.
    Ekestubbe A
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 138():1-82. PubMed ID: 10635103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The accuracy and reliability of radiographic methods for the assessment of marginal bone level around oral implants.
    De Smet E; Jacobs R; Gijbels F; Naert I
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 May; 31(3):176-81. PubMed ID: 12058265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.