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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1306859)

  • 1. Comparison of three imaging techniques for assessing endodontic working length.
    Griffiths BM; Brown JE; Hyatt AT; Linney AD
    Int Endod J; 1992 Nov; 25(6):279-87. PubMed ID: 1306859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Interpretation of endodontic file lengths using RadioVisiography.
    Leddy BJ; Miles DA; Newton CW; Brown CE
    J Endod; 1994 Nov; 20(11):542-5. PubMed ID: 7643038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Endodontic measurement accuracy and perceived radiograph quality: effects of film speed and density.
    Sheaffer JC; Eleazer PD; Scheetz JP; Clark SJ; Farman AG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Oct; 96(4):441-8. PubMed ID: 14561969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Radiovisiography for length estimation in root canal treatment: an in-vitro comparison with conventional radiography.
    Shearer AC; Horner K; Wilson NH
    Int Endod J; 1991 Sep; 24(5):233-9. PubMed ID: 1813427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of radiovisiography with radiographic film in root length determination.
    Ong EY; Pitt Ford TR
    Int Endod J; 1995 Jan; 28(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 7642325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiographic "working length" revisited.
    Stein TJ; Corcoran JF
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1992 Dec; 74(6):796-800. PubMed ID: 1488238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Radiovisiography versus conventional radiography for detection of small instruments in endodontic length determination. II. In vivo evaluation.
    Ellingsen MA; Hollender LG; Harrington GW
    J Endod; 1995 Oct; 21(10):516-20. PubMed ID: 8596074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An in vitro comparison of 10 radiographic methods for working length estimation.
    Rushton VE; Shearer AC; Horner K; Czajka J
    Int Endod J; 1995 May; 28(3):149-53. PubMed ID: 8626199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of film-based, digital, and enhanced digital images for endodontic length determination.
    Woolhiser GA; Brand JW; Hoen MM; Geist JR; Pikula AA; Pink FE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2005 Apr; 99(4):499-504. PubMed ID: 15772601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The use of E-speed film for root canal length determination.
    Powell-Cullingford AW; Pitt Ford TR
    Int Endod J; 1993 Sep; 26(5):268-72. PubMed ID: 8300258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Radiographic determination of canal length direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography.
    Hedrick RT; Dove SB; Peters DD; McDavid WD
    J Endod; 1994 Jul; 20(7):320-6. PubMed ID: 7996092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of voxel size and resolution on the accuracy of endodontic length measurement using cone beam computed tomography.
    Aktan AM; Yildirim C; Karataşlıoğlu E; Çiftçi ME; Aksoy F
    Ann Anat; 2016 Nov; 208():96-102. PubMed ID: 27339301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Measurement algorithm accuracy of the RVG-PCi in vertical and diagonal assessments at various beam energies.
    Garlock JA; Scarfe WC; Kamer KR; Farman AG
    J Endod; 1996 Dec; 22(12):646-50. PubMed ID: 9220748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Radiovisiography versus conventional radiography for detection of small instruments in endodontic length determination. Part 1. In vitro evaluation.
    Ellingsen MA; Harrington GW; Hollender LG
    J Endod; 1995 Jun; 21(6):326-31. PubMed ID: 7673842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Image quality of direct digital intraoral x-ray sensors in assessing root canal length. The RadioVisioGraphy, Visualix/VIXA, Sens-A-Ray, and Flash Dent systems compared with Ektaspeed films.
    Sanderink GC; Huiskens R; van der Stelt PF; Welander US; Stheeman SE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Jul; 78(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 8078654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of radiographic and electronic working lengths.
    Pratten DH; McDonald NJ
    J Endod; 1996 Apr; 22(4):173-6. PubMed ID: 8935014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography for estimation of canal length in curved canals.
    Burger CL; Mork TO; Hutter JW; Nicoll B
    J Endod; 1999 Apr; 25(4):260-3. PubMed ID: 10425952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. In vitro comparison of root-canal measurements with conventional and digital radiology.
    Lozano A; Forner L; Llena C
    Int Endod J; 2002 Jun; 35(6):542-50. PubMed ID: 12190912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of observer performance in determining the position of endodontic files with physical measures in the evaluation of dental X-ray imaging systems.
    Vandre RH; Pajak JC; Abdel-Nabi H; Farman TT; Farman AG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jul; 29(4):216-22. PubMed ID: 10918454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measurement of the distance between the minor foramen and the anatomic apex by digital and conventional radiography.
    Melius B; Jiang J; Zhu Q
    J Endod; 2002 Feb; 28(2):125-6. PubMed ID: 11833685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.