334 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22444351)
1. The reliability of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) - generated frontal cephalograms.
Kim SJ; Park SB; Kim YI; Cho BH; Hwang DS
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2012 Dec; 40(8):e331-6. PubMed ID: 22444351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison between conventional and cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms.
Cattaneo PM; Bloch CB; Calmar D; Hjortshøj M; Melsen B
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Dec; 134(6):798-802. PubMed ID: 19061807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Intraexaminer and interexaminer reliabilities of landmark identification on digitized lateral cephalograms and formatted 3-dimensional cone-beam computerized tomography images.
Lagravère MO; Low C; Flores-Mir C; Chung R; Carey JP; Heo G; Major PW
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 May; 137(5):598-604. PubMed ID: 20451778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison between two-dimensional and three-dimensional cephalometry on frontal radiographs and on cone beam computed tomography scans of human skulls.
van Vlijmen OJ; Maal TJ; Bergé SJ; Bronkhorst EM; Katsaros C; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
Eur J Oral Sci; 2009 Jun; 117(3):300-5. PubMed ID: 19583759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements.
Baumgaertel S; Palomo JM; Palomo L; Hans MG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):19-25; discussion 25-8. PubMed ID: 19577143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Measurements on 3D models of human skulls derived from two different cone beam CT scanners.
van Vlijmen OJ; Rangel FA; Bergé SJ; Bronkhorst EM; Becking AG; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
Clin Oral Investig; 2011 Oct; 15(5):721-7. PubMed ID: 20640463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability of traditional cephalometric landmarks as seen in three-dimensional analysis in maxillary expansion treatments.
Lagravère MO; Gordon JM; Guedes IH; Flores-Mir C; Carey JP; Heo G; Major PW
Angle Orthod; 2009 Nov; 79(6):1047-56. PubMed ID: 19852593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy and reliability of linear cephalometric measurements from cone-beam computed tomography scans of a dry human skull.
Berco M; Rigali PH; Miner RM; DeLuca S; Anderson NK; Will LA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):17.e1-9; discussion 17-8. PubMed ID: 19577142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy and repeatability of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) measurements used in the determination of facial indices in the laboratory setup.
Moerenhout BA; Gelaude F; Swennen GR; Casselman JW; Van Der Sloten J; Mommaerts MY
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2009 Jan; 37(1):18-23. PubMed ID: 18815053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment of the reliability and repeatability of landmarks using 3-D cephalometric software.
Frongia G; Piancino MG; Bracco AA; Crincoli V; Debernardi CL; Bracco P
Cranio; 2012 Oct; 30(4):255-63. PubMed ID: 23156966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison between full face and hemifacial CBCT cephalograms in clinically symmetrical patients: a pilot study.
Junqueira CH; Janson G; Junqueira MH; Mendes LM; Favilla EE; Garib DG
Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(2):83-9. PubMed ID: 25992992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The validity of transverse intermaxillary analysis by traditional PA cephalometry compared with cone-beam computed tomography.
Cheung G; Goonewardene MS; Islam SM; Murray K; Koong B
Aust Orthod J; 2013 May; 29(1):86-95. PubMed ID: 23785942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The reliability of using postero-anterior cephalometry and cone-beam CT to determine transverse dimensions in clinical practice.
Tai B; Goonewardene MS; Murray K; Koong B; Islam SM
Aust Orthod J; 2014 Nov; 30(2):132-42. PubMed ID: 25549515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison between two-dimensional and midsagittal three-dimensional cephalometric measurements of dry human skulls.
Damstra J; Fourie Z; Ren Y
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Jul; 49(5):392-5. PubMed ID: 20615593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Measurements from conventional, digital and CT-derived cephalograms: a comparative study.
Ghoneima A; Albarakati S; Baysal A; Uysal T; Kula K
Aust Orthod J; 2012 Nov; 28(2):232-9. PubMed ID: 23304973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program.
Periago DR; Scarfe WC; Moshiri M; Scheetz JP; Silveira AM; Farman AG
Angle Orthod; 2008 May; 78(3):387-95. PubMed ID: 18416632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Analysis of intra-arch and interarch measurements from digital models with 2 impression materials and a modeling process based on cone-beam computed tomography.
White AJ; Fallis DW; Vandewalle KS
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Apr; 137(4):456.e1-9; discussion 456-7. PubMed ID: 20362900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of linear and angular measurements on three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographic images.
Moreira CR; Sales MA; Lopes PM; Cavalcanti MG
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Sep; 108(3):430-6. PubMed ID: 19386521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The reliability of cephalometric measurements in oral and maxillofacial imaging: Cone beam computed tomography versus two-dimensional digital cephalograms.
Hariharan A; Diwakar NR; Jayanthi K; Hema HM; Deepukrishna S; Ghaste SR
Indian J Dent Res; 2016; 27(4):370-377. PubMed ID: 27723632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.
Kumar V; Ludlow J; Soares Cevidanes LH; Mol A
Angle Orthod; 2008 Sep; 78(5):873-9. PubMed ID: 18298214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
