These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31148581)

  • 1. Detection of alveolar bone defects with three different voxel sizes of cone-beam computed tomography: an in vitro study.
    Dong T; Yuan L; Liu L; Qian Y; Xia L; Ye N; Fang B
    Sci Rep; 2019 May; 9(1):8146. PubMed ID: 31148581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Factors affecting the accuracy of buccal alveolar bone height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images.
    Wood R; Sun Z; Chaudhry J; Tee BC; Kim DG; Leblebicioglu B; England G
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Mar; 143(3):353-63. PubMed ID: 23452969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Detection of periimplant fenestration and dehiscence with the use of two scan modes and the smallest voxel sizes of a cone-beam computed tomography device.
    de-Azevedo-Vaz SL; Vasconcelos Kde F; Neves FS; Melo SL; Campos PS; Haiter-Neto F
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2013 Jan; 115(1):121-7. PubMed ID: 23217543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of cone-beam computed tomography in the diagnosis of simulated small osseous defects in the mandibular condyle.
    Patel A; Tee BC; Fields H; Jones E; Chaudhry J; Sun Z
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Feb; 145(2):143-56. PubMed ID: 24485728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effectiveness of Periapical Radiography Versus Cone Beam Computed Tomography with Different Kilovoltage Settings in the Detection of Chemically Created Peri-implant Bone Defects: An In Vitro Study.
    Pinheiro LR; Scarfe WC; de Oliveira Sales MA; Gaia BF; Cortes AR; Gusmão Paraiso Cavalcanti M
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2017; 32(4):741-750. PubMed ID: 28708906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of the influence of FOV sizes and different voxel resolutions for the assessment of periodontal defects.
    Kolsuz ME; Bagis N; Orhan K; Avsever H; Demiralp KÖ
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2015; 44(7):20150070. PubMed ID: 25900235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Effect of bone thickness on alveolar bone-height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images.
    Sun Z; Smith T; Kortam S; Kim DG; Tee BC; Fields H
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Feb; 139(2):e117-27. PubMed ID: 21300222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digital method for quantification of circumferential periodontal bone level using cone beam CT.
    Fleiner J; Hannig C; Schulze D; Stricker A; Jacobs R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Mar; 17(2):389-96. PubMed ID: 22431146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of CBCT images in the assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant defects: effect of field of view.
    Kamburoğlu K; Murat S; Kılıç C; Yüksel S; Avsever H; Farman A; Scarfe WC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2014; 43(4):20130332. PubMed ID: 24645965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnostic accuracy of different display types in detection of recurrent caries under restorations by using CBCT.
    Baltacıoĝlu İH; Eren H; Yavuz Y; Kamburoğlu K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2016; 45(6):20160099. PubMed ID: 27319604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant and periodontal defects using a cone beam CT system with and without the application of metal artefact reduction mode.
    Kamburoglu K; Kolsuz E; Murat S; Eren H; Yüksel S; Paksoy CS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(8):20130176. PubMed ID: 23956236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography, dental magnetic resonance imaging, and intraoral radiography for detecting peri-implant bone defects at single zirconia implants-An in vitro study.
    Hilgenfeld T; Juerchott A; Deisenhofer UK; Krisam J; Rammelsberg P; Heiland S; Bendszus M; Schwindling FS
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Sep; 29(9):922-930. PubMed ID: 30112833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of linear measurements and visibility of the mandibular canal of cone-beam computed tomography images with different voxel sizes: an in vitro study.
    Waltrick KB; Nunes de Abreu Junior MJ; Corrêa M; Zastrow MD; Dutra VD
    J Periodontol; 2013 Jan; 84(1):68-77. PubMed ID: 22390549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Field of View and Acquisition Frame on the Detection of Chemically Simulated Peri-Implant Bone Loss In Vitro.
    Pinheiro LR; Scarfe WC; Augusto de Oliveira Sales M; Gaia BF; Cortes AR; Cavalcanti MG
    J Periodontol; 2015 Oct; 86(10):1159-65. PubMed ID: 26156676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Detection of periodontal bone loss using digital intraoral and cone beam computed tomography images: an in vitro assessment of bony and/or infrabony defects.
    Vandenberghe B; Jacobs R; Yang J
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jul; 37(5):252-60. PubMed ID: 18606746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An ex vivo comparison of diagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in the detection of furcal perforations.
    Kamburoğlu K; Yeta EN; Yılmaz F
    J Endod; 2015 May; 41(5):696-702. PubMed ID: 25684431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reliability and accuracy of cone beam computed tomography versus conventional multidetector computed tomography for image-guided craniofacial implant planning: An in vitro study.
    Dings JP; Verhamme L; Merkx MA; Xi T; Meijer GJ; Maal TJ
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(3):665–672. PubMed ID: 30934042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of different methods to assess alveolar cleft defects in cone beam CT images.
    de Rezende Barbosa GL; Wood JS; Pimenta LA; Maria de Almeida S; Tyndall DA
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2016; 45(2):20150332. PubMed ID: 26648387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cone-beam computed tomography and microtomography for alveolar bone measurements.
    Ferrare N; Leite AF; Caracas HC; de Azevedo RB; de Melo NS; de Souza Figueiredo PT
    Surg Radiol Anat; 2013 Aug; 35(6):495-502. PubMed ID: 23400642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.