202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36446924)
1. Effectiveness of cone-beam computed tomography-generated cephalograms using artificial intelligence cephalometric analysis.
Chung EJ; Yang BE; Park IY; Yi S; On SW; Kim YH; Kang SH; Byun SH
Sci Rep; 2022 Nov; 12(1):20585. PubMed ID: 36446924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Comparative study of cephalometric measurements using 3 imaging modalities.
Wen J; Liu S; Ye X; Xie X; Li J; Li H; Mei L
J Am Dent Assoc; 2017 Dec; 148(12):913-921. PubMed ID: 29042006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cephalometric measurements performed on CBCT and reconstructed lateral cephalograms: a cross-sectional study providing a quantitative approach of differences and bias.
Baldini B; Cavagnetto D; Baselli G; Sforza C; Tartaglia GM
BMC Oral Health; 2022 Mar; 22(1):98. PubMed ID: 35351080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Precision of orthodontic cephalometric measurements on ultra low dose-low dose CBCT reconstructed cephalograms.
van Bunningen RH; Dijkstra PU; Dieters A; van der Meer WJ; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM; Ren Y
Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Feb; 26(2):1543-1550. PubMed ID: 34453209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Accuracy of linear measurements from imaging plate and lateral cephalometric images derived from cone-beam computed tomography.
Moshiri M; Scarfe WC; Hilgers ML; Scheetz JP; Silveira AM; Farman AG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):550-60. PubMed ID: 17920510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Can modifying shielding, field of view, and exposure settings make the effective dose of a cone-beam computed tomography comparable to traditional radiographs used for orthodontic diagnosis?
Ting S; Attaia D; Johnson KB; Kossa SS; Friedland B; Allareddy V; Masoud MI
Angle Orthod; 2020 Sep; 90(5):655-664. PubMed ID: 33378479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of conventional lateral cephalograms with corresponding CBCT radiographs.
Park CS; Park JK; Kim H; Han SS; Jeong HG; Park H
Imaging Sci Dent; 2012 Dec; 42(4):201-5. PubMed ID: 23301204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of linear and angular measurements using two-dimensional conventional methods and three-dimensional cone beam CT images reconstructed from a volumetric rendering program in vivo.
Oz U; Orhan K; Abe N
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2011 Dec; 40(8):492-500. PubMed ID: 22065798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cephalogram synthesis and landmark detection in dental cone-beam CT systems.
Huang Y; Fan F; Syben C; Roser P; Mill L; Maier A
Med Image Anal; 2021 May; 70():102028. PubMed ID: 33744833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparative analysis of angular cephalometric values between CBCT generated lateral cephalograms versus digitized conventional lateral cephalograms.
Chung RR; Lagravere MO; Flores-Mir C; Heo G; Carey JP; Major PW
Int Orthod; 2009 Dec; 7(4):308-21. PubMed ID: 20303918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. "Ten-point" 3D cephalometric analysis using low-dosage cone beam computed tomography.
Farronato G; Garagiola U; Dominici A; Periti G; de Nardi S; Carletti V; Farronato D
Prog Orthod; 2010; 11(1):2-12. PubMed ID: 20529623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Cephalometry Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans.
Cassetta M; Altieri F; Di Giorgio R; Silvestri A
J Craniofac Surg; 2015 Jun; 26(4):e311-5. PubMed ID: 26080244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of the accuracy of linear measurements on lateral cephalograms obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans with digital lateral cephalometric radiography: an in vitro study.
Shokri A; Khajeh S; Khavid A
J Craniofac Surg; 2014 Sep; 25(5):1710-3. PubMed ID: 25203572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluating the accuracy of automated cephalometric analysis based on artificial intelligence.
Bao H; Zhang K; Yu C; Li H; Cao D; Shu H; Liu L; Yan B
BMC Oral Health; 2023 Apr; 23(1):191. PubMed ID: 37005593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs.
van Vlijmen OJ; Bergé SJ; Swennen GR; Bronkhorst EM; Katsaros C; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Jan; 67(1):92-7. PubMed ID: 19070753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A systematic review.
Raj G; Raj M; Saigo L
J Orthod; 2024 Jun; 51(2):160-176. PubMed ID: 37340975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Comparison of a tridimensional cephalometric analysis performed on 3T-MRI compared with CBCT: a pilot study in adults.
Maspero C; Abate A; Bellincioni F; Cavagnetto D; Lanteri V; Costa A; Farronato M
Prog Orthod; 2019 Oct; 20(1):40. PubMed ID: 31631241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
