199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33006000)
1. Comparison of the different voxel sizes in the estimation of peri-implant fenestration defects using cone beam computed tomography: an ex vivo study.
Kurt MH; Bağış N; Evli C; Atakan C; Orhan K
Int J Implant Dent; 2020 Oct; 6(1):58. PubMed ID: 33006000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of a metal artifact reduction algorithm and an adaptive image noise optimization filter in the estimation of peri-implant fenestration defects using cone beam computed tomography: an in-vitro study.
Bagis N; Kurt MH; Evli C; Camgoz M; Atakan C; Peker Ozturk H; Orhan K
Oral Radiol; 2022 Jul; 38(3):325-335. PubMed ID: 34387842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cone beam computed tomography artefacts around dental implants with different materials influencing the detection of peri-implant bone defects.
Schriber M; Yeung AWK; Suter VGA; Buser D; Leung YY; Bornstein MM
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2020 Jul; 31(7):595-606. PubMed ID: 32147872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of a metal artifact reduction algorithm and an optimization filter in the estimation of peri-implant dehiscence defects by using cone beam computed tomography: an in-vitro study.
Bayrak S; Orhan K; Kursun Çakmak ES; Görürgöz C; Odabaşı O; Yilmaz D; Atakan C
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2020 Aug; 130(2):209-216. PubMed ID: 32197878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Efficacy of low-dose cone beam computed tomography and metal artifact reduction tool for assessment of peri-implant bone defects: an in vitro study.
Nomier AS; Gaweesh YSE; Taalab MR; El Sadat SA
BMC Oral Health; 2022 Dec; 22(1):615. PubMed ID: 36528573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Effect of voxel size on detection of fenestration, dehiscence and furcation defects using cone-beam computed tomography.
Eftekhar M; Kaviani H; Rouzmeh N; Torabinia A; Akbarzadeh Baghban A
Oral Radiol; 2021 Oct; 37(4):677-686. PubMed ID: 33432538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of peri-implant defects at titanium and zirconium dioxide implants by means of periapical radiographs and cone beam computed tomography: An in-vitro examination.
Steiger-Ronay V; Krcmaric Z; Schmidlin PR; Sahrmann P; Wiedemeier DB; Benic GI
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Dec; 29(12):1195-1201. PubMed ID: 30387207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Influence of kilovoltage-peak and the metal artifact reduction tool in cone-beam computed tomography on the detection of bone defects around titanium-zirconia and zirconia implants.
Fontenele RC; Nascimento EHL; Imbelloni-Vasconcelos AC; Martins LAC; Pontual ADA; Ramos-Perez FMM; Freitas DQ
Imaging Sci Dent; 2022 Sep; 52(3):267-273. PubMed ID: 36238703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Diagnostic Accuracy of Three Cone Beam Computed Tomography Systems and Periapical Radiography for Detection of Fenestration Around Dental Implants.
Eskandarloo A; Saati S; Ardakani MP; Jamalpour M; Gholi Mezerji NM; Akheshteh V
Contemp Clin Dent; 2018; 9(3):376-381. PubMed ID: 30166830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Intra- and inter-observer agreements in detecting peri-implant bone defects between periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography: A clinical study.
Zhang CN; Zhu Y; Fan LF; Zhang X; Jiang YH; Gu YX
J Dent Sci; 2021 Jul; 16(3):948-956. PubMed ID: 34141109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Zirconia implants interfere with the evaluation of peri-implant bone defects in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images even with artifact reduction, a pilot study.
Kuusisto N; Abushahba F; Syrjänen S; Huumonen S; Vallittu P; Närhi T
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2023 Nov; 52(8):20230252. PubMed ID: 37641961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Efficacy of Metal Artifact Reduction Algorithm of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography for Detection of Fenestration and Dehiscence around Dental Implants.
Salemi F; Jamalpour MR; Eskandarloo A; Tapak L; Rahimi N
J Biomed Phys Eng; 2021 Jun; 11(3):305-314. PubMed ID: 34189119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Estimation of contrast-to-noise ratio in CT and CBCT images with varying scan settings in presence of different implant materials.
Kursun-Cakmak EŞ; Demirturk Kocasarac H; Bayrak S; Ustaoğlu G; Noujeim M
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2019 Dec; 48(8):20190139. PubMed ID: 31386553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Detection of peri-implant bone defects using cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography with parallel and oblique projection.
Vadiati Saberi B; Khosravifard N; Ghandari F; Hadinezhad A
Imaging Sci Dent; 2019 Dec; 49(4):265-272. PubMed ID: 31915611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Influence of the Milliamperage and Artifact Reduction Tool on the CBCT-Based Diagnosis of Buccal and Lingual Peri-implant Dehiscences: Comparison Between Two Types of Implants.
Nascimento EHL; Imbelloni-Vasconcelos AC; Fontenele RC; Gaêta-Araujo H; Moraes Ramos-Perez FM; Freitas DQ
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(6):1202-1209. PubMed ID: 36450026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
