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.
8. Evaluation of dimensional accuracy of panoramic cross-sectional tomography, its ability to identify the inferior alveolar canal, and its impact on estimation of appropriate implant dimensions in the mandibular posterior region. Mehra A; Pai KM Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Mar; 14(1):100-11. PubMed ID: 19673959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cross-sectional tomograms obtained with four panoramic radiographic units in the assessment of implant site measurements. Peltola JS; Mattila M Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Sep; 33(5):295-300. PubMed ID: 15585805 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy of extraoral tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT) for proximal caries detection. Harase Y; Araki K; Okano T Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2006 Jun; 101(6):791-6. PubMed ID: 16731402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An in vivo comparison of diagnostic information obtained from tuned-aperture computed tomography and conventional dental radiographic imaging modalities. Webber RL; Messura JK Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1999 Aug; 88(2):239-47. PubMed ID: 10468470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Identification of root canals in molars by tuned-aperture computed tomography. Nance R; Tyndall D; Levin LG; Trope M Int Endod J; 2000 Jul; 33(4):392-6. PubMed ID: 11307216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Two- and three-dimensional imaging modalities for the detection of caries. A comparison between film, digital radiography and tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT). Abreu JĂșnior M; Tyndall DA; Platin E; Ludlow JB; Phillips C Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 May; 28(3):152-7. PubMed ID: 10740469 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Dimensional accuracy and details of the panoramic cross-sectional tomographic images: an in vitro study. Kumar MA; Mody B; Nair GK; Surender LR; Gopal SS; Prasad RV J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jan; 13(1):85-97. PubMed ID: 22430700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cross-sectional imaging of the jaws for dental implant treatment: accuracy of linear tomography using a panoramic machine in comparison with reformatted computed tomography. Naitoh M; Kawamata A; Iida H; Ariji E Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(1):107-12. PubMed ID: 11858566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The role of objective plane angulation on the mandibular image using cross-sectional tomography. Naitoh M; Katsumata A; Kubota Y; Okumura S; Hayashi H; Ariji E J Oral Implantol; 2006; 32(3):117-21. PubMed ID: 16836175 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of conventional and TACT (Tuned Aperture Computed Tomography) digital subtraction radiography in detection of pericrestal bone-gain. Chai-U-Dom O; Ludlow JB; Tyndall DA; Webber RL J Periodontal Res; 2002 Apr; 37(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 12009184 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Subjective image quality assessment of cross sectional imaging methods for the symphyseal region of the mandible prior to dental implant placement. Shelley AM; Brunton P; Horner K J Dent; 2011 Nov; 39(11):764-70. PubMed ID: 21875641 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Linear unsharp mask filtering of linear cross-sectional tomograms of the posterior mandible. Chen SK; Hollender L Swed Dent J; 1995; 19(4):139-47. PubMed ID: 8560397 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]