217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20965675)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Effects of tube current on cone-beam computerized tomography image quality for presurgical implant planning in vitro.
Sur J; Seki K; Koizumi H; Nakajima K; Okano T
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Sep; 110(3):e29-33. PubMed ID: 20598589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Development of a low-dose protocol for cone beam CT examinations of the anterior maxilla in children.
Hidalgo Rivas JA; Horner K; Thiruvenkatachari B; Davies J; Theodorakou C
Br J Radiol; 2015 Oct; 88(1054):20150559. PubMed ID: 26279087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cone-beam CT for preoperative implant planning in the posterior mandible: visibility of anatomic landmarks.
Lofthag-Hansen S; Gröndahl K; Ekestubbe A
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2009 Sep; 11(3):246-55. PubMed ID: 18783419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Relationship between physical factors and subjective image quality of cone-beam computed tomography images according to diagnostic task.
Choi JW; Lee SS; Choi SC; Heo MS; Huh KH; Yi WJ; Kang SR; Han DH; Kim EK
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2015 Mar; 119(3):357-65. PubMed ID: 25592866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Morphology of the nasopalatine canal and dental implant surgery: a radiographic analysis of 100 consecutive patients using limited cone-beam computed tomography.
Bornstein MM; Balsiger R; Sendi P; von Arx T
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2011 Mar; 22(3):295-301. PubMed ID: 21039896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Absorbed and effective doses from cone beam volumetric imaging for implant planning.
Okano T; Harata Y; Sugihara Y; Sakaino R; Tsuchida R; Iwai K; Seki K; Araki K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Feb; 38(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 19176649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Optimization of cone beam CT exposure for pre-surgical evaluation of the implant site.
Dawood A; Brown J; Sauret-Jackson V; Purkayastha S
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2012 Jan; 41(1):70-4. PubMed ID: 22184628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Conventional spiral and low-dose computed mandibular tomography for dental implant planning.
Ekestubbe A
Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 138():1-82. PubMed ID: 10635103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of radiation dose and image quality for dental cone-beam computed tomography in pediatric patients.
Ito M; Chida K; Onodera S; Kojima I; Iikubo M; Kato T; Fujisawa M; Zuguchi M
J Radiol Prot; 2023 Sep; 43(3):. PubMed ID: 37696261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cone beam computed tomography for dental and maxillofacial imaging: technique improvement and low-dose protocols.
Feragalli B; Rampado O; Abate C; Macrì M; Festa F; Stromei F; Caputi S; Guglielmi G
Radiol Med; 2017 Aug; 122(8):581-588. PubMed ID: 28365888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view.
Hirsch E; Wolf U; Heinicke F; Silva MA
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jul; 37(5):268-73. PubMed ID: 18606748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of dose reduction on multi-detector computed tomographic images in evaluating the maxilla and mandible for pre-surgical implant planning: a cadaveric study.
Koizumi H; Sur J; Seki K; Nakajima K; Sano T; Okano T
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2010 Aug; 21(8):830-4. PubMed ID: 20666797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Calculating effective dose on a cone beam computed tomography device: 3D Accuitomo and 3D Accuitomo FPD.
Lofthag-Hansen S; Thilander-Klang A; Ekestubbe A; Helmrot E; Gröndahl K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Feb; 37(2):72-9. PubMed ID: 18239034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Cone Beam Computed Tomography for the Dental Implant Patient.
Klokkevold PR
J Calif Dent Assoc; 2015 Sep; 43(9):521-30. PubMed ID: 26820009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Convex triangular vs. cylindrical field of view: how does the shape of the FOV affect radiation dose?
Cascante-Sequeira D; Oliveira-Santos C; Brasil DM; Santaella GM; Swanson C; Blackburn M; Scarfe WC; Haiter-Neto F
Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Dec; 27(12):7881-7888. PubMed ID: 37993703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
