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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8626199)

  • 21. Radiographic versus electronic root canal working length determination.
    Kqiku L; Städtler P
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):777-80. PubMed ID: 22484869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. An in vivo comparative evaluation to determine the accuracy of working length between radiographic and electronic apex locators.
    Singh SV; Nikhil V; Singh AV; Yadav S
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012; 23(3):359-62. PubMed ID: 23059573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Comparison of three imaging techniques for assessing endodontic working length.
    Griffiths BM; Brown JE; Hyatt AT; Linney AD
    Int Endod J; 1992 Nov; 25(6):279-87. PubMed ID: 1306859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Measurement of the distance between the minor foramen and the anatomic apex by digital and conventional radiography.
    Melius B; Jiang J; Zhu Q
    J Endod; 2002 Feb; 28(2):125-6. PubMed ID: 11833685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Linear measurements to determine working length of curved canals with fine files: conventional versus digital radiography.
    Brito-Júnior M; Santos LA; Baleeiro EN; Pêgo MM; Eleutério NB; Camilo CC
    J Oral Sci; 2009 Dec; 51(4):559-64. PubMed ID: 20032608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Dose reduction of two digital sensor systems measuring file lengths.
    Velders XL; Sanderink GC; van der Stelt PF
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1996 May; 81(5):607-12. PubMed ID: 8734712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effect of various digital processing algorithms on the measurement accuracy of endodontic file length.
    Kal BI; Baksi BG; Dündar N; Sen BH
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2007 Feb; 103(2):280-4. PubMed ID: 17234548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Ex vivo comparison of radiographic and electronic root canal length measurements in primary molars.
    Topaloglu-Ak A; Aykut Yetkiner A; Güniz Baksi B; Eronat C
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2015 Jun; 16(2):149-53. PubMed ID: 26147823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Proportional length determination: mathematical method.
    Pink FE; Sachs E
    Gen Dent; 1994; 42(5):428-31; quiz 433-4. PubMed ID: 7489875
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of observer performance in determining the position of endodontic files with physical measures in the evaluation of dental X-ray imaging systems.
    Vandre RH; Pajak JC; Abdel-Nabi H; Farman TT; Farman AG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jul; 29(4):216-22. PubMed ID: 10918454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Working length in root canal fillings.
    Pagan JC; Santa CA; Alvarez JA
    N Y State Dent J; 1993 Nov; 59(9):41-3. PubMed ID: 8247456
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A comparison of Kodak Ultraspeed and Ektaspeed Plus dental X-ray films for use in endodontics.
    Moule AJ; Wong A; Monsour PA; Basford KE
    Aust Dent J; 2001 Jun; 46(2):95-9. PubMed ID: 11491237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of voxel size and resolution on the accuracy of endodontic length measurement using cone beam computed tomography.
    Aktan AM; Yildirim C; Karataşlıoğlu E; Çiftçi ME; Aksoy F
    Ann Anat; 2016 Nov; 208():96-102. PubMed ID: 27339301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Ex vivo investigation on the postoperative integrity of the apical constriction after the sole use of electronic working length determination.
    Wolgin M; Grundmann MJ; Tchorz JP; Frank W; Kielbassa AM
    J Dent; 2017 Sep; 64():52-57. PubMed ID: 28642058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Determination of the apical limits of instrumentation by subtraction using the paralleling radiographic technic. (Study contribution)].
    Solbo LJ; Pesce HF; Bombana AC
    Rev Faculdade Odontol FZL; 1989; 1(1):29-38. PubMed ID: 2701074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Methodological considerations in the determination of working length.
    Martínez-Lozano MA; Forner-Navarro L; Sánchez-Cortés JL; Llena-Puy C
    Int Endod J; 2001 Jul; 34(5):371-6. PubMed ID: 11482720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [The evaluation of the ability of Apex D.S.P. to determine the length of root canal. In vitro study].
    Lewińska E; Lipski M; Marciniak-Paradowska M; Woźniak K; Lichota D
    Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2008; 54(2):37-40. PubMed ID: 19374229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Imaging of root canal fillings: a comparison of subjective image quality between limited cone-beam CT, storage phosphor and film radiography.
    Soğur E; Baksi BG; Gröndahl HG
    Int Endod J; 2007 Mar; 40(3):179-85. PubMed ID: 17305694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A comparison between in vivo radiographic working length determination and measurement after extraction.
    Williams CB; Joyce AP; Roberts S
    J Endod; 2006 Jul; 32(7):624-7. PubMed ID: 16793467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.