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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8158504)

  • 21. Radiographic parameters for the evaluation of peri-implant tissues.
    Brägger U
    Periodontol 2000; 1994 Feb; 4():87-97. PubMed ID: 9673197
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Digital subtraction radiography for assessing alveolar bone grafts: diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity.
    Maruko EY; Forbes DP
    Northwest Dent Res; 1993; 4(1):21-3. PubMed ID: 8148133
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Detection of simulated periodontal bone gain by digital subtraction radiography with tuned-aperture computed tomography. The effect of angular disparity.
    Chai-U-Dom O; Ludlow JB; Tyndall DA; Webber RL
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Mar; 30(2):92-7. PubMed ID: 11313728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Contrast enhancement as an aid to interpretation in digital subtraction radiography.
    Reddy MS; Bruch JM; Jeffcoat MK; Williams RC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Jun; 71(6):763-9. PubMed ID: 2062529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Measurement accuracy of marginal bone level in digital radiographs with and without color coding.
    Li G; Engström PE; Welander U
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2007 Oct; 65(5):254-8. PubMed ID: 18092199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A comparison of methods to assess marginal bone height around endosseous implants.
    Meijer HJ; Steen WH; Bosman F
    J Clin Periodontol; 1993 Apr; 20(4):250-3. PubMed ID: 8473534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Limitations of the digital image subtraction technique in assessing alveolar bone crest changes due to misalignment errors during image capture.
    Benn DK
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1990 Aug; 19(3):97-104. PubMed ID: 2088789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A new method for the automated alignment of dental radiographs for digital subtraction radiography.
    Yoon DC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jan; 29(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 10654031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Quantitative analysis of periodontal defects in a skull model by subtraction radiography using a digital imaging device.
    Young SJ; Chaibi MS; Graves DT; Majzoub Z; Boustany F; Cochran D; Nummikoski P
    J Periodontol; 1996 Aug; 67(8):763-9. PubMed ID: 8866315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of panoramic radiography and panoramic digital subtraction radiography in the detection of simulated osteophytic lesions of the mandibular condyle.
    Masood F; Katz JO; Hardman PK; Glaros AG; Spencer P
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2002 May; 93(5):626-31. PubMed ID: 12075216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Digital radiography of interproximal bone loss; validity of different filters.
    Eickholz P; Riess T; Lenhard M; Hassfeld S; Staehle HJ
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 May; 26(5):294-300. PubMed ID: 10355620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Digital subtraction radiography for longitudinal assessment of peri-implant bone change: method and validation.
    Jeffcoat MK; Reddy MS
    Adv Dent Res; 1993 Aug; 7(2):196-201. PubMed ID: 8260008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Computer-assisted densitometric image analysis of digital subtraction images: in vivo error of the method and effect of thresholding.
    Brägger U; Bürgin W; Fourmousis I; Schmid G; Schild U; Lang NP
    J Periodontol; 1998 Sep; 69(9):967-74. PubMed ID: 9776024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Efficacy of quantitative digital subtraction radiography using radiographs exposed in a multicenter trial.
    Jeffcoat MK; Reddy MS; Magnusson I; Johnson B; Meredith MP; Cavanaugh PF; Gerlach RW
    J Periodontal Res; 1996 Apr; 31(3):157-60. PubMed ID: 8814584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of hard tissue density changes around implants assessed in digitized conventional radiographs and subtraction images.
    Bittar-Cortez JA; Passeri LA; Bóscolo FN; Haiter-Neto F
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2006 Oct; 17(5):560-4. PubMed ID: 16958697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The detection of in vitro produced periodontal bone lesions by conventional radiography and photographic subtraction radiography using observers and quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Janssen PT; van Palenstein Helderman WH; van Aken J
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Jul; 16(6):335-41. PubMed ID: 2668346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Digital subtraction of radiograph in evaluating alveolar bone changes after initial periodontal therapy.
    Okano T; Mera T; Ohki M; Ishikawa I; Yamada N
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1990 Feb; 69(2):258-62. PubMed ID: 2406677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Development of automated registration algorithms for subtraction radiography.
    Ettinger GJ; Gordon GG; Goodson JM; Socransky SS; Williams R
    J Clin Periodontol; 1994 Sep; 21(8):540-3. PubMed ID: 7989617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Relationship of texture measurements to the prediction of correct evaluations in subtraction radiography.
    Allen K; Emrich L; Piedmonte M; Hausmann E
    J Periodontal Res; 1992 May; 27(3):197-206. PubMed ID: 1608033
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluation of three contrast correction methods for digital subtraction in dental radiography: an in vitro study.
    Likar B; Pernus F
    Med Phys; 1997 Feb; 24(2):299-307. PubMed ID: 9048371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.