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.
208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19492636)
21. 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]
22. Digital volume tomography in the diagnosis of peri-implant defects: an in vitro study on native pig mandibles. Mengel R; Kruse B; Flores-de-Jacoby L J Periodontol; 2006 Jul; 77(7):1234-41. PubMed ID: 16805688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants. Ersoy AE; Turkyilmaz I; Ozan O; McGlumphy EA J Periodontol; 2008 Aug; 79(8):1339-45. PubMed ID: 18672982 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Interpretation of chemically created periapical lesions using 2 different dental cone-beam computerized tomography units, an intraoral digital sensor, and conventional film. Ozen T; Kamburoğlu K; Cebeci AR; Yüksel SP; Paksoy CS Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Mar; 107(3):426-32. PubMed ID: 18996725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Dental cone beam computed tomography: justification for use in planning oral implant placement. Jacobs R; Quirynen M Periodontol 2000; 2014 Oct; 66(1):203-13. PubMed ID: 25123769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The radiographic assessment of implant patients: decision-making criteria. Dula K; Mini R; van der Stelt PF; Buser D Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(1):80-9. PubMed ID: 11280366 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Digital implant impressions by cone-beam computerized tomography: a pilot study. Corominas-Delgado C; Espona J; Lorente-Gascón M; Real-Voltas F; Roig M; Costa-Palau S Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Nov; 27(11):1407-1413. PubMed ID: 26715129 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Assessments of jaw bone density at implant sites using 3D cone-beam computed tomography. Hao Y; Zhao W; Wang Y; Yu J; Zou D Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2014; 18(9):1398-403. PubMed ID: 24867520 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Valente F; Schiroli G; Sbrenna A Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(2):234-42. PubMed ID: 19492638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The use of cone-beam computed tomography in an orthodontic department in between research and daily clinic. Cattaneo PM; Melsen B World J Orthod; 2008; 9(3):269-82. PubMed ID: 18834009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Evaluation of subjective image quality in relation to diagnostic task for cone beam computed tomography with different fields of view. Lofthag-Hansen S; Thilander-Klang A; Gröndahl K Eur J Radiol; 2011 Nov; 80(2):483-8. PubMed ID: 20965675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Non-radiological method for three-dimensional implant position evaluation using an intraoral scan method. von See C; Wagner ME; Schumann P; Lindhorst D; Gellrich NC; Stoetzer M Clin Oral Implants Res; 2014 Sep; 25(9):1091-3. PubMed ID: 23799977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Evaluation of retromolar canals on cone beam computerized tomography scans and digital panoramic radiographs. Palma LF; Buck AF; Kfouri FÁ; Blachman IT; Lombardi LA; Cavalli MA Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Sep; 21(3):307-312. PubMed ID: 28573345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Comparison of radiation dose for implant imaging using conventional spiral tomography, computed tomography, and cone-beam computed tomography. Chau AC; Fung K Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Apr; 107(4):559-65. PubMed ID: 19168378 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. [Evaluation of image quality of two different three-dimensional cone-beam-scanners used for orthopedic surgery in the bony structures of the pelvis in comparison with standard CT scans]. Stuby F; Seethaler AC; Shiozawa T; Weise K; Mroue A; Badke A; Buchgeister M; Ochs BG Z Orthop Unfall; 2011 Dec; 149(6):659-67. PubMed ID: 21590660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Metal artifacts from posterior mandibular implants as seen in CBCT. Naitoh M; Saburi K; Gotoh K; Kurita K; Ariji E Implant Dent; 2013 Apr; 22(2):151-4. PubMed ID: 23399788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Planning of dental implant size with digital panoramic radiographs, CBCT-generated panoramic images, and CBCT cross-sectional images. Correa LR; Spin-Neto R; Stavropoulos A; Schropp L; da Silveira HE; Wenzel A Clin Oral Implants Res; 2014 Jun; 25(6):690-5. PubMed ID: 23442085 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]