244 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]
