387 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15978824)
1. Three-dimensional fetal cephalometry: an evaluation of the reliability of cephalometric measurements based on three-dimensional CT reconstructions and on dry skulls of sheep fetuses.
Papadopoulos MA; Jannowitz C; Boettcher P; Henke J; Stolla R; Zeilhofer HF; Kovacs L; Erhardt W; Biemer E; Papadopulos NA
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2005 Aug; 33(4):229-37. PubMed ID: 15978824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls.
van Vlijmen OJ; Maal T; Bergé SJ; Bronkhorst EM; Katsaros C; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Feb; 39(2):156-60. PubMed ID: 20044238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Three-dimensional computed tomography cephalometric craniofacial analysis: experimental validation in vitro.
Olszewski R; Zech F; Cosnard G; Nicolas V; Macq B; Reychler H
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2007 Sep; 36(9):828-33. PubMed ID: 17825530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of the reliability of craniofacial anatomic landmarks based on cephalometric radiographs and three-dimensional CT scans.
Kragskov J; Bosch C; Gyldensted C; Sindet-Pedersen S
Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 1997 Mar; 34(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 9138504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Accuracy of the anthropometric measurements of skeletonized skulls with corresponding measurements of their 3D reconstructions obtained by CT scanning.
Lorkiewicz-Muszyńska D; Kociemba W; Sroka A; Kulczyk T; Żaba C; Paprzycki W; Przystańska A
Anthropol Anz; 2015; 72(3):293-301. PubMed ID: 26131560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings.
Sayinsu K; Isik F; Trakyali G; Arun T
Eur J Orthod; 2007 Feb; 29(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 17290023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Three-dimensional cephalometry: spiral multi-slice vs cone-beam computed tomography.
Swennen GR; Schutyser F
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Sep; 130(3):410-6. PubMed ID: 16979502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Development of the 3D-cephalogram: a technical note.
Kamiishi H; Miyasato Y; Kosaka M
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2007; 35(4-5):258-60. PubMed ID: 17601743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.
Kumar V; Ludlow JB; Mol A; Cevidanes L
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jul; 36(5):263-9. PubMed ID: 17586852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Three-dimensional cephalometric evaluation of maxillary growth following in utero repair of cleft lip and alveolar-like defects in the mid-gestational sheep model.
Papadopoulos MA; Papadopulos NA; Jannowitz C; Boettcher P; Henke J; Stolla R; Zeilhofer HF; Kovacs L; Biemer E
Fetal Diagn Ther; 2006; 21(1):105-14. PubMed ID: 16354987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reproducibility assessment of Delaire cephalometric analysis using reconstructions from computed tomography.
Debelmas A; Ketoff S; Lanciaux S; Corre P; Friess M; Khonsari RH
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2020 Feb; 121(1):35-39. PubMed ID: 31055092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accuracy of linear measurements from imaging plate and lateral cephalometric images derived from cone-beam computed tomography.
Moshiri M; Scarfe WC; Hilgers ML; Scheetz JP; Silveira AM; Farman AG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):550-60. PubMed ID: 17920510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Validation of a simple method for measuring cranial deformities (plagiocephalometry).
van Adrichem LN; van Vlimmeren LA; Cadanová D; Helders PJ; Engelbert RH; van Neck HJ; Koning AH
J Craniofac Surg; 2008 Jan; 19(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 18216659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [A study on the stability and reliability of 3D laser cranio-maxillofacial reconstruction].
Zhang J; Lü P; Wang Y
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2002 Nov; 37(6):469-71. PubMed ID: 12641967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Use of hand-held laser scanning in the assessment of craniometry.
Park HK; Chung JW; Kho HS
Forensic Sci Int; 2006 Jul; 160(2-3):200-6. PubMed ID: 16289612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A comparison between computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and laser scanning for capturing 3-dimensional data from a natural ear to aid rehabilitation.
Coward TJ; Scott BJ; Watson RM; Richards R
Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(1):92-100. PubMed ID: 16479767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Digital forensic osteology--possibilities in cooperation with the Virtopsy project.
Verhoff MA; Ramsthaler F; Krähahn J; Deml U; Gille RJ; Grabherr S; Thali MJ; Kreutz K
Forensic Sci Int; 2008 Jan; 174(2-3):152-6. PubMed ID: 17451898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of cephalometric measurements with digital versus conventional cephalometric analysis.
Celik E; Polat-Ozsoy O; Toygar Memikoglu TU
Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 19237509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of the accuracy of linear measurements on spiral computed tomography-derived three-dimensional images and its comparison with digital cephalometric radiography.
Varghese S; Kailasam V; Padmanabhan S; Vikraman B; Chithranjan A
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2010 May; 39(4):216-23. PubMed ID: 20395462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements.
Baumgaertel S; Palomo JM; Palomo L; Hans MG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):19-25; discussion 25-8. PubMed ID: 19577143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
