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.
157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14508739)
1. Tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT) for cross-sectional implant site assessment in the posterior mandible. Rashedi B; Tyndall DA; Ludlow JB; Chaffee NR; Guckes AD J Prosthodont; 2003 Sep; 12(3):176-86. PubMed ID: 14508739 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Accuracy of mandibular cross-sectional imaging with tuned- aperture computed tomography (TACT), iteratively reconstructed TACT, and multidirectional, linear, and transverse panoramic tomography. Liang H; Tyndall DA; Ludlow JB; Lang LA; Nunn ME Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 May; 91(5):594-602. PubMed ID: 11346741 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cross-sectional presurgical implant imaging using tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT). Liang H; Tyndall DA; Ludlow JB; Lang LA Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jul; 28(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 10455387 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Array geometry for assessment of mandibular implant position using tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT). Limrachtamorn S; Edge MJ; Gettleman L; Scheetz JP; Farman AG Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 15140819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Array-projection geometry and depth discrimination with Tuned-Aperture Computed Tomography for assessing the relationship between tooth roots and the inferior alveolar canal. Morant RD; Eleazer PD; Scheetz JP; Farman AG Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Feb; 91(2):252-9. PubMed ID: 11174606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Interpretation of linear and computed tomograms in the assessment of implant recipient sites. Todd AD; Gher ME; Quintero G; Richardson AC J Periodontol; 1993 Dec; 64(12):1243-9. PubMed ID: 8106953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative evaluation of Tuned Aperture Computed Tomography for the detection of mandibular fractures. Nair MK; Webber RL; Johnson MP Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Sep; 29(5):297-301. PubMed ID: 10980566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
12. 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]
13. [Pre-implantation evaluation using medical imagery: scanner or Scanora?]. Hanssens JF Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 1996; 51(2):101-10. PubMed ID: 9289749 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of two-dimensional orthoradially reformatted computed tomography and panoramic radiography for dental implant treatment planning. Lam EW; Ruprecht A; Yang J J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Jul; 74(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 7674189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Measurement accuracy of reconstructed 2-D images obtained by multi-slice helical computed tomography. Naitoh M; Katsumata A; Nohara E; Ohsaki C; Ariji E Clin Oral Implants Res; 2004 Oct; 15(5):570-4. PubMed ID: 15355399 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Computed tomography for dental implants: the influence of the gantry angle and mandibular positioning on the bone height and width. Dantas JA; Montebello Filho A; Campos PS Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 Jan; 34(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 15709099 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of projection geometry and number of projections on accuracy of depth discrimination with tuned-aperture computed tomography in dentistry. Yamamoto K; Farman AG; Webber RL; Horton RA; Kuroyanagi K Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Jul; 86(1):126-30. PubMed ID: 9690258 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]