130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37993703)
1. Convex triangular vs. cylindrical field of view: how does the shape of the FOV affect radiation dose?
Cascante-Sequeira D; Oliveira-Santos C; Brasil DM; Santaella GM; Swanson C; Blackburn M; Scarfe WC; Haiter-Neto F
Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Dec; 27(12):7881-7888. PubMed ID: 37993703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Does cone-beam CT convex triangular field of view influence the image shape distortion of high-density materials?
Cascante-Sequeira D; Coelho-Silva F; Lopes Rosado LP; Lucca LV; Queiroz Freitas D; Lins de-Azevedo-Vaz S; Haiter-Neto F
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2023 Nov; 52(8):20230029. PubMed ID: 37427699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of the expression of the volumetric alteration artifact in cylindrical and triangular fields of view in two cone-beam computed tomography devices.
Cascante-Sequeira D; Coelho-Silva F; Rosado LPL; Freitas DQ; de-Azevedo-Vaz SL; Haiter-Neto F
Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Jan; 26(1):1025-1033. PubMed ID: 34324084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Does the shape of the field-of-view influence the magnitude of artefacts from high-density materials in cone-beam computed tomography?
Cascante-Sequeira D; Fontenele RC; Martins LAC; Brasil DM; Oliveira ML; Freitas DQ; Haiter-Neto F
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2023 Oct; 52(7):20230147. PubMed ID: 37493606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using GafChromic film to estimate the effective dose from dental cone beam CT and panoramic radiography.
Al-Okshi A; Nilsson M; Petersson A; Wiese M; Lindh C
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(7):20120343. PubMed ID: 23610090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effective radiation dose and eye lens dose in dental cone beam CT: effect of field of view and angle of rotation.
Pauwels R; Zhang G; Theodorakou C; Walker A; Bosmans H; Jacobs R; Bogaerts R; Horner K;
Br J Radiol; 2014 Oct; 87(1042):20130654. PubMed ID: 25189417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effective doses from cone beam CT investigation of the jaws.
Davies J; Johnson B; Drage N
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2012 Jan; 41(1):30-6. PubMed ID: 22184626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Scatter-to-primary ratio in dentomaxillofacial cone-beam CT: effect of field of view and beam energy.
Pauwels R; Pittayapat P; Sinpitaksakul P; Panmekiate S
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2021 Dec; 50(8):20200597. PubMed ID: 33882256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Dosimetry of the cone beam computed tomography Veraviewepocs 3D compared with the 3D Accuitomo in different fields of view.
Hirsch E; Wolf U; Heinicke F; Silva MA
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jul; 37(5):268-73. PubMed ID: 18606748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effective doses of dental cone beam computed tomography: effect of 360-degree versus 180-degree rotation angles.
Mutalik S; Tadinada A; Molina MR; Sinisterra A; Lurie A
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2020 Oct; 130(4):433-446. PubMed ID: 32616450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Dosimetry of a cone beam CT device for oral and maxillofacial radiology using Monte Carlo techniques and ICRP adult reference computational phantoms.
Morant JJ; Salvadó M; Hernández-Girón I; Casanovas R; Ortega R; Calzado A
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(3):92555893. PubMed ID: 22933532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dosimetry in CBCT with Different Protocols: Emphasis on Small FOVs Including Exams for TMJ.
Nascimento HAR; Andrade MEA; Frazão MAG; Nascimento EHL; Ramos-Perez FMM; Freitas DQ
Braz Dent J; 2017; 28(4):511-516. PubMed ID: 29160405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of thyroid gland shielding on radiation doses in dental cone beam computed tomography with small and medium fields of view.
Grüning M; Koivisto J; Mah J; Bumann A
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2022 Aug; 134(2):245-253. PubMed ID: 35534405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Hand-wrist, knee, and foot-ankle dosimetry and image quality measurements of a novel extremity imaging unit providing CBCT and 2D imaging options.
Ludlow JB
Med Phys; 2018 Nov; 45(11):4955-4963. PubMed ID: 30229941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistry.
Roberts JA; Drage NA; Davies J; Thomas DW
Br J Radiol; 2009 Jan; 82(973):35-40. PubMed ID: 18852212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of subjective image quality in relation to diagnostic task for cone beam computed tomography with different fields of view.
Lofthag-Hansen S; Thilander-Klang A; Gröndahl K
Eur J Radiol; 2011 Nov; 80(2):483-8. PubMed ID: 20965675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effect of optimum, indication-specific imaging fields on the radiation exposure from CBCT examinations of impacted maxillary canines and mandibular third molars.
Ilo AM; Waltimo-Sirén J; Pakbaznejad Esmaeili E; Ekholm M; Kortesniemi M
Acta Odontol Scand; 2024 Jan; 82(1):66-73. PubMed ID: 38058132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Small field of view cone beam CT temporomandibular joint imaging dosimetry.
Lukat TD; Wong JC; Lam EW
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(10):20130082. PubMed ID: 24048693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cone beam computed tomography radiation dose and image quality assessments.
Lofthag-Hansen S
Swed Dent J Suppl; 2010; (209):4-55. PubMed ID: 21229915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
