113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20729188)
1. A novel alignment device for cone beam computed tomography: principle and application.
Dawood A; Sauret-Jackson V; Patel S; Darwood A
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2010 Sep; 39(6):375-82. PubMed ID: 20729188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effective radiation dose and eye lens dose in dental cone beam CT: effect of field of view and angle of rotation.
Pauwels R; Zhang G; Theodorakou C; Walker A; Bosmans H; Jacobs R; Bogaerts R; Horner K;
Br J Radiol; 2014 Oct; 87(1042):20130654. PubMed ID: 25189417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cone beam computed tomography radiation dose and image quality assessments.
Lofthag-Hansen S
Swed Dent J Suppl; 2010; (209):4-55. PubMed ID: 21229915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Scatter-to-primary ratio in dentomaxillofacial cone-beam CT: effect of field of view and beam energy.
Pauwels R; Pittayapat P; Sinpitaksakul P; Panmekiate S
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2021 Dec; 50(8):20200597. PubMed ID: 33882256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. External Cervical Resorption: A Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficacy Using 2 Different Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Units and Periapical Radiographs.
Vaz de Souza D; Schirru E; Mannocci F; Foschi F; Patel S
J Endod; 2017 Jan; 43(1):121-125. PubMed ID: 27939734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effective dose range for dental cone beam computed tomography scanners.
Pauwels R; Beinsberger J; Collaert B; Theodorakou C; Rogers J; Walker A; Cockmartin L; Bosmans H; Jacobs R; Bogaerts R; Horner K;
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Feb; 81(2):267-71. PubMed ID: 21196094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners.
Suomalainen A; Kiljunen T; Käser Y; Peltola J; Kortesniemi M
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):367-78. PubMed ID: 19700530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Detection of various anatomic patterns of root canals in mandibular incisors using digital periapical radiography, 3 cone-beam computed tomographic scanners, and micro-computed tomographic imaging.
Paes da Silva Ramos Fernandes LM; Rice D; Ordinola-Zapata R; Alvares Capelozza AL; Bramante CM; Jaramillo D; Christensen H
J Endod; 2014 Jan; 40(1):42-5. PubMed ID: 24331989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Rotating and translating anthropomorphic head voxel models to establish an horizontal Frankfort plane for dental CBCT Monte Carlo simulations: a dose comparison study.
Stratis A; Zhang G; Jacobs R; Bogaerts R; Bosmans H
Phys Med Biol; 2016 Dec; 61(24):N681-N696. PubMed ID: 27893451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantification of bone quality using different cone beam computed tomography devices: Accuracy assessment for edentulous human mandibles.
Van Dessel J; Nicolielo LF; Huang Y; Slagmolen P; Politis C; Lambrichts I; Jacobs R
Eur J Oral Implantol; 2016; 9(4):411-424. PubMed ID: 27990508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Image quality vs radiation dose of four cone beam computed tomography scanners.
Loubele M; Jacobs R; Maes F; Denis K; White S; Coudyzer W; Lambrichts I; van Steenberghe D; Suetens P
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Sep; 37(6):309-18. PubMed ID: 18757715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reduction of scatter-induced image noise in cone beam computed tomography: effect of field of view size and position.
Pauwels R; Jacobs R; Bogaerts R; Bosmans H; Panmekiate S
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2016 Feb; 121(2):188-95. PubMed ID: 26792756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Analysis of intensity variability in multislice and cone beam computed tomography.
Nackaerts O; Maes F; Yan H; Couto Souza P; Pauwels R; Jacobs R
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2011 Aug; 22(8):873-9. PubMed ID: 21244502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cone beam CT in dental practice.
Dawood A; Patel S; Brown J
Br Dent J; 2009 Jul; 207(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 19590551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cone beam CT: a current overview of devices.
Nemtoi A; Czink C; Haba D; Gahleitner A
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(8):20120443. PubMed ID: 23818529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of physical quality assurance between Scanora 3D and 3D Accuitomo 80 dental CT scanners.
Ali AS; Fteita D; Kulmala J
Libyan J Med; 2015; 10(1):28038. PubMed ID: 26091832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography and medical computed tomography: implications for clinical diagnostics with guided surgery.
Abboud M; Calvo-Guirado JL; Orentlicher G; Wahl G
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(2):536-42. PubMed ID: 23527357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry.
Roberts JA; Drage NA; Davies J; Thomas DW
Br J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 82(973):35-40. PubMed ID: 18852212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Endodontic Working Length Measurement Using Cone-beam Computed Tomographic Images Obtained at Different Voxel Sizes and Field of Views, Periapical Radiography, and Apex Locator: A Comparative Ex Vivo Study.
Yılmaz F; Kamburoğlu K; Şenel B
J Endod; 2017 Jan; 43(1):152-156. PubMed ID: 27986097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A quality assurance framework for the fully automated and objective evaluation of image quality in cone-beam computed tomography.
Steiding C; Kolditz D; Kalender WA
Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 41(3):031901. PubMed ID: 24593719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
