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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20376234)

  • 1. The location of cemento enamel junction for CAL measurement: A clinical crisis.
    Vandana KL; Gupta I
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2009 Jan; 13(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 20376234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of probing attachment levels using a new computerized cemento-enamel junction probe.
    Deepa R; Prakash S
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2012 Jan; 16(1):74-9. PubMed ID: 22654322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Measurement of clinical attachment levels using a constant-force periodontal probe modified to detect the cemento-enamel junction.
    Preshaw PM; Kupp L; Hefti AF; Mariotti A
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Jul; 26(7):434-40. PubMed ID: 10412847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative evaluation of accuracy of periodontal probing depth and attachment levels using a Florida probe versus traditional probes.
    Gupta N; Rath SK; Lohra P
    Med J Armed Forces India; 2015 Oct; 71(4):352-8. PubMed ID: 26663963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of probing attachment levels using a CEJ probe versus traditional probes.
    Karpinia K; Magnusson I; Gibbs C; Yang MC
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 15016020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Enamel matrix derivative in intrabony defects: prognostic parameters of clinical and radiographic treatment outcomes.
    Parashis AO; Polychronopoulou A; Tsiklakis K; Tatakis DN
    J Periodontol; 2012 Nov; 83(11):1346-52. PubMed ID: 22248222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A periodontal probe with automated cemento--enamel junction detection-design and clinical trials.
    Jeffcoat MK; Jeffcoat RL; Captain K
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1991 Apr; 38(4):330-3. PubMed ID: 1855793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Stent as an accessory tool in periodontal measurements: An insight.
    Singh S; Vandana KL
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2019; 23(1):81-84. PubMed ID: 30692750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Reappraisal of the Accuracy of the Tactile Method for the Detection of the Subgingival Cementoenamel Junction: An In Vivo Study.
    Mokhagul J; Lertpimonchai A; Samaranayake L; Charatkulangkun O
    Eur J Dent; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38759998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reliability of attachment level measurements using the cementoenamel junction and a plastic stent.
    Clark DC; Chin Quee T; Bergeron MJ; Chan EC; Lautar-Lemay C; de Gruchy K
    J Periodontol; 1987 Feb; 58(2):115-8. PubMed ID: 3469400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Swept-source optical coherence tomographic observation on prevalence and variations of cemento-enamel junction morphology.
    Araveti SK; Hiraishi N; Kominami N; Otsuki M; Sumi Y; Yiu CKY; Tagami J
    Lasers Med Sci; 2020 Feb; 35(1):213-219. PubMed ID: 31342201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cementoenamel junction: An insight.
    Vandana KL; Haneet RK
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2014 Sep; 18(5):549-54. PubMed ID: 25425813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detection of the cemento-enamel junction with three different probes: an "in vitro" model.
    Barendregt DS; van der Velden U; Timmerman MF; Bulthuis HM; van der Weijden F
    J Clin Periodontol; 2009 Mar; 36(3):212-8. PubMed ID: 19196382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The prognostic value of several periodontal factors measured as radiographic bone level variation: a 10-year retrospective multilevel analysis of treated and maintained periodontal patients.
    Nieri M; Muzzi L; Cattabriga M; Rotundo R; Cairo F; Pini Prato GP
    J Periodontol; 2002 Dec; 73(12):1485-93. PubMed ID: 12546099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A new periodontal probe with automated cemento-enamel junction detection.
    Jeffcoat MK; Jeffcoat RL; Jens SC; Captain K
    J Clin Periodontol; 1986 Apr; 13(4):276-80. PubMed ID: 3458724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Imaging the Cemento-Enamel Junction Using a 20-MHz Ultrasonic Transducer.
    Nguyen KC; Le LH; Kaipatur NR; Major PW
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2016 Jan; 42(1):333-8. PubMed ID: 26546266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Enamel matrix derivative versus bioactive ceramic filler in the treatment of intrabony defects: 12-month results.
    Leknes KN; Andersen KM; Bøe OE; Skavland RJ; Albandar JM
    J Periodontol; 2009 Feb; 80(2):219-27. PubMed ID: 19186961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Visual and tactile observational error: comparative probing reliability with recession and cementoenamel junction measurements.
    Watts TL
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1989 Dec; 17(6):310-2. PubMed ID: 2591184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of radiovisiography and digital volume tomography to direct surgical measurements in the detection of infrabony defects.
    Raichur PS; Setty SB; Thakur SL; Naikmasur VG
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2012 Feb; 4(1):e43-7. PubMed ID: 24558524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reproducibility of attachment level measurements with two models of the Florida Probe.
    Marks RG; Low SB; Taylor M; Baggs R; Magnusson I; Clark WB
    J Clin Periodontol; 1991 Nov; 18(10):780-4. PubMed ID: 1753003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.