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.
94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8553039)
21. Receiver operating characteristics of RadioVisioGraphy. Dagenais ME; Clark BG Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 Feb; 79(2):238-45. PubMed ID: 7614189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Evaluation of the new RadioVisioGraphy system image quality. Benz C; Mouyen F Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Nov; 72(5):627-31. PubMed ID: 1745524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Estimated skin exposure as an indicator for comparing radiovisiography (RVG) versus conventional Ektaspeed Plus dental radiography. Jones GA; Schuman NJ; Woods MA J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1998; 22(2):121-3. PubMed ID: 9643185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Fracture diagnosis with digital luminescence radiography]. Klein HM; Wein B; Langen HJ; Glaser KH; Stargardt A; Günther RW Rofo; 1991 Jun; 154(6):582-6. PubMed ID: 1648759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Interpretation of endodontic file lengths using RadioVisiography. Leddy BJ; Miles DA; Newton CW; Brown CE J Endod; 1994 Nov; 20(11):542-5. PubMed ID: 7643038 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Film-less digital x-ray image processing--new prospects with the RadioVisioGraphy equipment]. Mairgünther RH Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1994; 104(1):31-4. PubMed ID: 8108689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Effects of technical parameters on image perception using two types of dental radiographs. Nielsen PM; Weber HP; zen Ruffinen S; Brecx M; Joss A; Lang NP Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1989; 99(7):777-81. PubMed ID: 2692154 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Conventional and indirect digital radiographic interpretation of oral unilocular radiolucent lesions. Raitz R; Correa L; Curi M; Dib L; Fenyo-Pereira M Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 May; 35(3):165-9. PubMed ID: 16618849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [A comparison between endoral radiography and electronic magnification of digital orthopantomography]. Nessi R; Lazzerini F; Minorati D; Blanc M; Uslenghi CM Radiol Med; 1995 Sep; 90(3):226-31. PubMed ID: 7501826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [The value of digital imaging techniques in skeletal imaging]. Lehmann KJ; Busch HP; Sommer A; Georgi M Rofo; 1991 Mar; 154(3):286-91. PubMed ID: 1849297 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Radiographic detection of accessory/lateral canals: use of RadioVisioGraphy and Hypaque. Scarfe WC; Fana CR; Farman AG J Endod; 1995 Apr; 21(4):185-90. PubMed ID: 7673818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Comparison of the efficacy of conventional radiography, digital radiography, and ultrasound in diagnosing periapical lesions. Raghav N; Reddy SS; Giridhar AG; Murthy S; Yashodha Devi BK; Santana N; Rakesh N; Kaushik A Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Sep; 110(3):379-85. PubMed ID: 20727498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Digital subtraction radiography for detecting cortical and cancellous bone changes in the periapical region. Tyndall DA; Kapa SF; Bagnell CP J Endod; 1990 Apr; 16(4):173-8. PubMed ID: 2074408 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The influence of image quality on radiographic diagnosis of approximal caries. Svenson B Swed Dent J Suppl; 1991; 74():1-62. PubMed ID: 2035145 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of computer-generated, enhanced and conventional 2-dimensional radiographic imaging. Hazey MA; Ngan P; Reed H; Razmus T; Crout R; Kao E Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Apr; 135(4):463-7. PubMed ID: 19361732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. [Detection of small bone lesions with digital radiography using storage phosphors]. Salvini E; Zincone G; Fossati N; Crivellaro M; Crespi A; Loda A; Paruccini N; Pastori R Radiol Med; 1991 May; 81(5):705-8. PubMed ID: 2057602 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity of a new digital subtraction system: an in vitro study. Dove SB; McDavid WD; Hamilton KE Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Jun; 89(6):771-6. PubMed ID: 10846136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Personal computer equipment for dental digital subtraction radiography vs. industrial computer equipment and conventional radiography. Möystad A; Svanaes DB; Larheim TA Scand J Dent Res; 1992 Apr; 100(2):117-22. PubMed ID: 1574677 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]