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 *

79 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8997675)

  • 1. Image homogeneity and recording reproducibility with 2 techniques for serial intra-oral radiography.
    Sander L; Wenzel A; Hintze H; Karring T
    J Periodontol; 1996 Dec; 67(12):1288-91. PubMed ID: 8997675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sensor noise in direct digital imaging (the RadioVisioGraphy, Sens-a-Ray, and Visualix/Vixa systems) evaluated by subtraction radiography.
    Wenzel A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Jan; 77(1):70-4. PubMed ID: 8108102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A quantitative analysis of subtraction images based on bite-wing radiographs for simulated victim identification in forensic dentistry.
    Wenzel A; Andersen L
    J Forensic Odontostomatol; 1994 Jun; 12(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 9227082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of stent versus laser- and cephalostat-aligned periapical film-positioning techniques for use in digital subtraction radiography.
    Ludlow JB; Peleaux CP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Feb; 77(2):208-15. PubMed ID: 8139840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Algorithm for the automated alignment of radiographs for image subtraction.
    Samarabandu J; Allen KM; Hausmann E; Acharya R
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Jan; 77(1):75-9. PubMed ID: 8108103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validation of quantitative digital subtraction radiography using the electronically guided alignment device/impression technique.
    Hausmann E; Allen K; Loza J; Buchanan W; Cavanaugh PF
    J Periodontol; 1996 Sep; 67(9):895-9. PubMed ID: 8884647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In vivo determination of radiographic projection errors produced by a novel filmholder and an x-ray beam manipulator.
    Zappa U; Simona C; Graf H; van Aken J
    J Periodontol; 1991 Nov; 62(11):674-83. PubMed ID: 1753320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sources of noise in digital subtraction radiography.
    Wenzel A; Sewerin I
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Apr; 71(4):503-8. PubMed ID: 2052339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Automatic noise robust registration of radiographs for subtraction using strategic local correlation: an application to radiographs of dental implants.
    Yi WJ; Heo MS; Lee SS; Choi SC; Lee SB; Huh KH
    Comput Biol Med; 2005 Mar; 35(3):247-58. PubMed ID: 15582631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Performance for obtaining maximal gain from a program for digital subtraction radiography.
    Aagaard E; Donslund C; Wenzel A; Sewerin I
    Scand J Dent Res; 1991 Apr; 99(2):166-72. PubMed ID: 2052898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Research methods in dentistry. 8. Methods for longitudinally detecting differences in bone density: digital subtraction radiography].
    van der Stelt PF
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2005 Feb; 112(2):46-50. PubMed ID: 15747997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of independent film and object rotation on projective geometric standardization of dental radiographs.
    Fisher E; van der Stelt PF; Ostuni J; Dunn SM
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Feb; 24(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 8593908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Improved diagnosis with digital radiography.
    van der Stelt PF
    Curr Opin Dent; 1992 Dec; 2():1-6. PubMed ID: 1298452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Subtraction radiography.
    Vannier MW
    J Periodontol; 1996 Sep; 67(9):949-50. PubMed ID: 8884654
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Noise in subtraction images made from pairs of intraoral radiographs: a comparison between four methods of geometric alignment.
    Kozakiewicz M; Bogusiak K; Hanclik M; Denkowski M; Arkuszewski P
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Jan; 37(1):40-6. PubMed ID: 18195254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Implant image quality in dental radiographs recorded using a customized imaging guide or a standard film holder.
    Schropp L; Stavropoulos A; Spin-Neto R; Wenzel A
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Jan; 23(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 21488967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A new method for standardization of intraoral radiographs.
    Kiliç AR; Efeoglu E; Yilmaz S
    Periodontal Clin Investig; 1996; 18(2):20-6. PubMed ID: 9116467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effect of in-vivo-occurring errors in the reproducibility of radiographs on the use of the subtraction technique.
    Janssen PT; van Palenstein Helderman WH; van Aken J
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Jan; 16(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 2644313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Geometric alignment and chromatic calibration of serial radiographic images.
    Dornier C; Dorsaz-Brossa L; Thévenaz P; Casagni F; Brochut P; Mombelli A; Vallée J
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jul; 33(4):220-5. PubMed ID: 15533974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.