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.
155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17900939)
21. Variations in the vestibular cortical bone of permanent canine teeth in orthodontic patients. a comparative study: linear tomography vs. cbct (3d accuitomo). Mateu ME; Martínez ME; Dagum H; Benítez Rogé SC; Bruno GI; Hecht P; Folco AA Acta Odontol Latinoam; 2014; 27(2):58-62. PubMed ID: 25523955 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A comparative evaluation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multi-Slice CT (MSCT). Part II: On 3D model accuracy. Liang X; Lambrichts I; Sun Y; Denis K; Hassan B; Li L; Pauwels R; Jacobs R Eur J Radiol; 2010 Aug; 75(2):270-4. PubMed ID: 19423257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Comparison of 64-Detector-Multislice and Cone Beam Computed Tomographies in the Evaluation of Linear Measurements in the Alveolar Ridge. Pena de Andrade JG; Valerio CS; de Oliveira Monteiro MA; de Carvalho Machado V; Manzi FR Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(2):132-4. PubMed ID: 26929949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of different methods of assessing alveolar ridge dimensions prior to dental implant placement. Chen LC; Lundgren T; Hallström H; Cherel F J Periodontol; 2008 Mar; 79(3):401-5. PubMed ID: 18315421 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Accuracy of anatomical landmark identification using different CBCT- and MSCT-based 3D images: an in vitro study. Medelnik J; Hertrich K; Steinhäuser-Andresen S; Hirschfelder U; Hofmann E J Orofac Orthop; 2011 Aug; 72(4):261-78. PubMed ID: 21898195 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Accuracy of linear measurements using three imaging modalities: two lateral cephalograms and one 3D model from CBCT data. Pittayapat P; Bornstein MM; Imada TS; Coucke W; Lambrichts I; Jacobs R Eur J Orthod; 2015 Apr; 37(2):202-8. PubMed ID: 25161199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Comparison between multislice and cone-beam computerized tomography in the volumetric assessment of cleft palate. Albuquerque MA; Gaia BF; Cavalcanti MG Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Aug; 112(2):249-57. PubMed ID: 21664153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Influence of cone beam CT scanning parameters on grey value measurements at an implant site. Parsa A; Ibrahim N; Hassan B; Motroni A; van der Stelt P; Wismeijer D Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(3):79884780. PubMed ID: 22933535 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Morphometric analysis - Cone beam computed tomography to predict bone quality and quantity. Hohlweg-Majert B; Metzger MC; Kummer T; Schulze D J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2011 Jul; 39(5):330-4. PubMed ID: 21030266 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth. Patcas R; Müller L; Ullrich O; Peltomäki T Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Jan; 141(1):41-50. PubMed ID: 22196184 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Alveolar bone measurements in magnetic resonance imaging compared with cone beam computed tomography: a pilot, Fuglsig JMCES; Hansen B; Schropp L; Nixdorf DR; Wenzel A; Spin-Neto R Acta Odontol Scand; 2023 Apr; 81(3):241-248. PubMed ID: 36112428 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Accuracy of linear measurements using dental cone beam and conventional multislice computed tomography. Suomalainen A; Vehmas T; Kortesniemi M; Robinson S; Peltola J Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jan; 37(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 18195249 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Accuracy of linear measurement provided by cone beam computed tomography to assess bone quantity in the posterior maxilla: a human cadaver study. Veyre-Goulet S; Fortin T; Thierry A Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2008 Dec; 10(4):226-30. PubMed ID: 18384410 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Vertical bone measurements from cone beam computed tomography images using different software packages. Vasconcelos TV; Neves FS; Moraes LA; Freitas DQ Braz Oral Res; 2015; 29():. PubMed ID: 25715034 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Assessment of linear measurements of bone for implant sites in the presence of metallic artefacts using cone beam computed tomography and multislice computed tomography. Cremonini CC; Dumas M; Pannuti CM; Neto JB; Cavalcanti MG; Lima LA Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Aug; 40(8):845-50. PubMed ID: 21621979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Measurements of mandibular canal region obtained by cone-beam computed tomography: a cadaveric study. Kamburoğlu K; Kiliç C; Ozen T; Yüksel SP Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Feb; 107(2):e34-42. PubMed ID: 19138636 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Objective and subjective image evaluation of maxillary alveolar bone based on cone beam computed tomography exposure parameters. de Moura PM; Hallac RR; Seaward JR; Kane AA; Aguiar M; Raggio R; Gutfilen B Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2016 May; 121(5):557-65. PubMed ID: 27068313 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of ridge mapping and cone beam computed tomography for planning dental implant therapy. Luk LC; Pow EH; Li TK; Chow TW Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(1):70-4. PubMed ID: 21365040 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Accuracy of MDCT and CBCT in three-dimensional evaluation of the oropharynx morphology. Chen H; van Eijnatten M; Aarab G; Forouzanfar T; de Lange J; van der Stelt P; Lobbezoo F; Wolff J Eur J Orthod; 2018 Jan; 40(1):58-64. PubMed ID: 28453722 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]