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 *

224 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2074408)

  • 1. Digital subtraction radiography for detecting cortical and cancellous bone changes in the periapical region.
    Tyndall DA; Kapa SF; Bagnell CP
    J Endod; 1990 Apr; 16(4):173-8. PubMed ID: 2074408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sensitivity of various radiographic methods for detection of oral cancellous bone lesions.
    Parsell DE; Gatewood RS; Watts JD; Streckfus CF
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Oct; 86(4):498-502. PubMed ID: 9798239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Studies on the use of digital radiography for the assessment of periapical bone lesions.
    Kullendorff B
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1996; 118():1-40. PubMed ID: 8971996
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Computer-assisted subtraction radiography in periodontal diagnosis.
    Gröndahl K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1987; 50():1-44. PubMed ID: 3321498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Diagnosis of alveolar bone changes with digital subtraction images and conventional radiographs. An in vitro study.
    Nicopoulou-Karayianni K; Brägger U; Bürgin W; Nielsen PM; Lang NP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Aug; 72(2):251-6. PubMed ID: 1923405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiographic evaluation of implant-obscured bone. Comparison of digitally subtracted tomographic and periapical techniques.
    Ludlow JB; Gates W; Nason R
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 Sep; 80(3):351-7. PubMed ID: 7489280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Subtraction radiography of interradicular bone lesions.
    Kullendorff B; Gröndahl K; Rohlin M; Nilsson M
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1992 Oct; 50(5):259-67. PubMed ID: 1441929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Television radiographic evaluation of periapical osseous radiolucencies.
    Kasle MJ; Klein AI
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1976 Jun; 41(6):789-96. PubMed ID: 1063984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The detection of in vitro produced periodontal bone lesions by conventional radiography and photographic subtraction radiography using observers and quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Janssen PT; van Palenstein Helderman WH; van Aken J
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Jul; 16(6):335-41. PubMed ID: 2668346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Computer-assisted densitometric image analysis of digital subtraction images: in vivo error of the method and effect of thresholding.
    Brägger U; Bürgin W; Fourmousis I; Schmid G; Schild U; Lang NP
    J Periodontol; 1998 Sep; 69(9):967-74. PubMed ID: 9776024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of external root resorption using digital subtraction radiography.
    Kravitz LH; Tyndall DA; Bagnell CP; Dove SB
    J Endod; 1992 Jun; 18(6):275-84. PubMed ID: 1402585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Intra-oral storage phosphor and conventional radiography in the assessment of alveolar bone structures.
    Kaeppler G; Vogel A; Axmann-Krcmar D
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Nov; 29(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 11114666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Development of virtual simulation platform for investigation of the radiographic features of periapical bone lesion.
    Gao Y; Haapasalo M; Shen Y; Wu H; Jiang H; Zhou X
    J Endod; 2010 Aug; 36(8):1404-9. PubMed ID: 20647106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy in detecting bone lesions in vitro with conventional and subtracted direct digital imaging.
    Stassinakis A; Brägger U; Stojanovic M; Bürgin W; Lussi A; Lang NP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Nov; 24(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 9161167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Digitally Scanned Radiographs versus Conventional Films for Determining Clarity of Periapical Lesions and Quality of Root Canal Treatment.
    Almanei K; Alsulaimani R; Alfadda S; Albabtain S; Alsulaimani R
    ScientificWorldJournal; 2017; 2017():2427060. PubMed ID: 29270461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography for the determination of small changes in bone thickness: an in vitro study.
    Christgau M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G; Kolbeck C; Wenzel A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Apr; 85(4):462-72. PubMed ID: 9574959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity of a new digital subtraction system: an in vitro study.
    Dove SB; McDavid WD; Hamilton KE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Jun; 89(6):771-6. PubMed ID: 10846136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of independent film and object rotation on projective geometric standardization of dental radiographs.
    Fisher E; van der Stelt PF; Ostuni J; Dunn SM
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Feb; 24(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 8593908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Detectability of artificial periapical lesions using direct digital and conventional radiography.
    Barbat J; Messer HH
    J Endod; 1998 Dec; 24(12):837-42. PubMed ID: 10023266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of stent versus laser- and cephalostat-aligned periapical film-positioning techniques for use in digital subtraction radiography.
    Ludlow JB; Peleaux CP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Feb; 77(2):208-15. PubMed ID: 8139840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.