247 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23536038)
1. Comparison of radiation dose, workflow, patient comfort and financial break-even of standard digital radiography and a novel biplanar low-dose X-ray system for upright full-length lower limb and whole spine radiography.
Dietrich TJ; Pfirrmann CW; Schwab A; Pankalla K; Buck FM
Skeletal Radiol; 2013 Jul; 42(7):959-67. PubMed ID: 23536038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessment of lower limb length and alignment by biplanar linear radiography: comparison with supine CT and upright full-length radiography.
Guggenberger R; Pfirrmann CW; Koch PP; Buck FM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Feb; 202(2):W161-7. PubMed ID: 24450698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The EOS 2D/3D X-ray imaging system: a cost-effectiveness analysis quantifying the health benefits from reduced radiation exposure.
Faria R; McKenna C; Wade R; Yang H; Woolacott N; Sculpher M
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Aug; 82(8):e342-9. PubMed ID: 23473735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of image quality using a X-ray stereotactical whole-body system and a direct flat-panel X-ray device in examinations of the pelvis and knee.
Krug KB; Weber C; Schwabe H; Sinzig NM; Wein B; Müller D; Wegmann K; Peters S; Sendler V; Ewen K; Hellmich M; Maintz D
Rofo; 2014 Jan; 186(1):67-76. PubMed ID: 23999782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Image Distortion in Biplanar Slot Scanning: Patient-specific Factors.
Welborn MC; Bouton D; Baksh N; Degan T; Sienko S
J Pediatr Orthop; 2020 Oct; 40(9):468-473. PubMed ID: 32205683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of 3-dimensional spinal reconstruction accuracy: biplanar radiographs with EOS versus computed tomography.
Glaser DA; Doan J; Newton PO
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Jul; 37(16):1391-7. PubMed ID: 22415001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. EOS low-dose radiography: a reliable and accurate upright assessment of lower-limb lengths.
Escott BG; Ravi B; Weathermon AC; Acharya J; Gordon CL; Babyn PS; Kelley SP; Narayanan UG
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2013 Dec; 95(23):e1831-7. PubMed ID: 24306706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Optimization of X-ray conditions for full spine X-ray examinations in slot-scan digital radiography].
Noto K; Minami S; Morishita A; Yokoi T; Iida H; Matsubara K; Takemura A; Koshida K
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2011; 67(11):1438-42. PubMed ID: 22104236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of biplanar linear radiography versus conventional radiographs when used for lower limb and implant measurements.
Chua CXK; Tan SHS; Lim AKS; Hui JH
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2022 May; 142(5):735-745. PubMed ID: 33386975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy on the preoperative assessment of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using biplanar low-dose stereoradiography: a comparison with computed tomography.
Yeung KH; Man GCW; Lam TP; Ng BKW; Cheng JCY; Chu WCW
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2020 Aug; 21(1):558. PubMed ID: 32811481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Difference in whole spinal alignment between supine and standing positions in patients with adult spinal deformity using a new comparison method with slot-scanning three-dimensional X-ray imager and computed tomography through digital reconstructed radiography.
Hasegawa K; Okamoto M; Hatsushikano S; Caseiro G; Watanabe K
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2018 Dec; 19(1):437. PubMed ID: 30522465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. EOS 2D/3D X-ray imaging system: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
McKenna C; Wade R; Faria R; Yang H; Stirk L; Gummerson N; Sculpher M; Woolacott N
Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(14):1-188. PubMed ID: 22449757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prospective randomized comparison of radiation exposure from full spine radiographs obtained in three different techniques.
Kluba T; Schäfer J; Hahnfeldt T; Niemeyer T
Eur Spine J; 2006 Jun; 15(6):752-6. PubMed ID: 16758107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Performance of automatic exposure control on dose and image quality: comparison between slot-scanning and flat-panel digital radiography systems.
Boissonnat G; Morichau-Beauchant P; Reshef A; Villa C; Désauté P; Simon AC
Med Phys; 2023 Feb; 50(2):1162-1184. PubMed ID: 36069636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Implementation of a patient dose monitoring system in conventional digital X-ray imaging: initial experiences.
Heilmaier C; Zuber N; Weishaupt D
Eur Radiol; 2017 Mar; 27(3):1021-1031. PubMed ID: 27339438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Validation and reproducibility of a biplanar imaging system versus conventional radiography of foot and ankle radiographic parameters.
Rungprai C; Goetz JE; Arunakul M; Gao Y; Femino JE; Amendola A; Phisitkul P
Foot Ankle Int; 2014 Nov; 35(11):1166-75. PubMed ID: 25082963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Productivity and cost assessment of computed radiography, digital radiography, and screen-film for outpatient chest examinations.
Andriole KP
J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):161-9. PubMed ID: 12532253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Modern digital plain-radiography of the whole spine in scoliosis patients--dose reduction and quality criteria].
Kloth JK; Wiedenhoefer B; Stiller W; Burkholder I; Kauczor HU; Ewerbeck V; Weber MA
Rofo; 2013 Jan; 185(1):48-54. PubMed ID: 23023231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Femoral and tibial torsion measurement in children and adolescents: comparison of 3D models based on low-dose biplanar radiography and low-dose CT.
Rosskopf AB; Ramseier LE; Sutter R; Pfirrmann CW; Buck FM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Mar; 202(3):W285-91. PubMed ID: 24555627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Occupational and patient exposure as well as image quality for full spine examinations with the EOS imaging system.
Damet J; Fournier P; Monnin P; Sans-Merce M; Ceroni D; Zand T; Verdun FR; Baechler S
Med Phys; 2014 Jun; 41(6):063901. PubMed ID: 24877841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
