685 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28228135)
1. Comparison of digital panoramic radiography versus cone beam computerized tomography for measuring alveolar bone.
Tang Z; Liu X; Chen K
Head Face Med; 2017 Feb; 13(1):2. PubMed ID: 28228135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cone beam computed tomography as a method of quantitative and qualitative analysis of alveolar crest in the frontal mandibular area.
Georgescu CE; Mihai A; Didilescu AC; Moraru R; Nimigean V; Nimigean VR; Tănase G
Rom J Morphol Embryol; 2010; 51(4):713-7. PubMed ID: 21103631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Anterior maxilla alveolar ridge dimension and morphology measurement by cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) for immediate implant treatment planning.
Zhang W; Skrypczak A; Weltman R
BMC Oral Health; 2015 Jun; 15():65. PubMed ID: 26059796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Implant-guided volumetric analysis of edentulous maxillary bone with cone-beam computerized tomography scan. Maxillary sinus pneumatization classification.
Tolstunov L; Thai D; Arellano L
J Oral Implantol; 2012 Aug; 38(4):377-90. PubMed ID: 22913308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of Osseointegration in Implants using Digital Orthopantomogram and Cone Beam Computed Tomography.
Chopra A; Mhapuskar AA; Marathe S; Nisa SU; Thopte S; Saddiwal R
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Nov; 17(11):953-957. PubMed ID: 27965508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Diagnostic value of dental implants in the posterior maxilla using cone beam computed tomography].
Fan LF; Pan XG; Pu YP; Lai HC
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2008 Oct; 17(5):548-51. PubMed ID: 18989602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography findings in preoperative examination of impacted mandibular third molars.
Peker I; Sarikir C; Alkurt MT; Zor ZF
BMC Oral Health; 2014 Jun; 14():71. PubMed ID: 24928108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of 2D OPG image versus orthopantomogram from 3D CBCT from the forensic point of view.
Eliasova H; Dostalova T; Prochazka A; Sediva E; Horacek M; Urbanova P; Hlinakova P
Leg Med (Tokyo); 2021 Feb; 48():101802. PubMed ID: 33478657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of cone-beam imaging with orthopantomography and computerized tomography for assessment in presurgical implant dentistry.
Dreiseidler T; Mischkowski RA; Neugebauer J; Ritter L; Zöller JE
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(2):216-25. PubMed ID: 19492636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The evaluation of vertical heights of maxillary and mandibular bones and the location of anatomic landmarks in panoramic radiographs of edentulous patients for implant dentistry.
Güler AU; Sumer M; Sumer P; Biçer I
J Oral Rehabil; 2005 Oct; 32(10):741-6. PubMed ID: 16159352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The reliability of surgeons to avoid traumatic insertion of dental implants into high-risk regions: a panoramic radiograph study.
Jamil FA; Mohammed JA; Hasan TA; Rzoqi MG
BMC Oral Health; 2020 Apr; 20(1):96. PubMed ID: 32252728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An In Vivo and Cone Beam Computed Tomography Investigation of the Accuracy in Measuring Alveolar Bone Height and Detecting Dehiscence and Fenestration Defects.
Peterson AG; Wang M; Gonzalez S; Covell DA; Katancik J; Sehgal HS
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(6):1296-1304. PubMed ID: 30427960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Orthopantomography
Rodríguez M; Marshall M; Godoy C; Richa R; Niklander SE
Curr Med Imaging; 2024; 20():1-7. PubMed ID: 38389337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Implications of Virtual CBCT-Based Immediate Implant Planning for Maxillary and Mandibular First Molars.
Zhang LQ; Duan DH; Wang EB; Wang HL; Liu Z
J Oral Implantol; 2022 Oct; 48(5):386-390. PubMed ID: 34412125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of mesiodistal root angulation of teeth by conventional panoramic and cone beam computed tomography images - A cross-sectional study.
Barakaat AA; Maaz M; Sukhia RH; Fida M
Int Orthod; 2023 Sep; 21(3):100757. PubMed ID: 37163932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Topographic analysis of maxillary premolars and molars and maxillary sinus using cone beam computed tomography.
Yoshimine S; Nishihara K; Nozoe E; Yoshimine M; Nakamura N
Implant Dent; 2012 Dec; 21(6):528-35. PubMed ID: 23114831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Facial Fenestration and Dehiscence Defects Associated With Immediate Implant Placement Without Flap Elevation in Anterior Maxillary Ridge: A Preliminary Cone Beam Computed Tomography Study.
Lin CY; Pan WL; Wang HL
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(5):1112-1118. PubMed ID: 30231099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cone-beam computed tomography and digital model analysis of maxillary buccal alveolar bone thickness for vertical temporary skeletal anchorage device placement.
Giap HV; Lee JY; Nguyen H; Chae HS; Kim YH; Shin JW
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2022 May; 161(5):e429-e438. PubMed ID: 35346539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Accuracy of linear measurements using cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in dental implant treatment planning.
Luangchana P; Pornprasertsuk-Damrongsri S; Kiattavorncharoen S; Jirajariyavej B
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(6):1287-94. PubMed ID: 26574854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The use of cone beam CT for the removal of wisdom teeth changes the surgical approach compared with panoramic radiography: a pilot study.
Ghaeminia H; Meijer GJ; Soehardi A; Borstlap WA; Mulder J; Vlijmen OJ; Bergé SJ; Maal TJ
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Aug; 40(8):834-9. PubMed ID: 21507612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
