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 *

64 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9220748)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. In vitro radiographic determination of distances from working length files to root ends comparing Kodak RVG 6000, Schick CDR, and Kodak insight film.
    Radel RT; Goodell GG; McClanahan SB; Cohen ME
    J Endod; 2006 Jun; 32(6):566-8. PubMed ID: 16728253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Radiovisiography versus conventional radiography for detection of small instruments in endodontic length determination. Part 1. In vitro evaluation.
    Ellingsen MA; Harrington GW; Hollender LG
    J Endod; 1995 Jun; 21(6):326-31. PubMed ID: 7673842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. In vivo comparison of Visualix-2 and Ektaspeed Plus in the assessment of periradicular lesion dimensions.
    Farman AG; Avant SL; Scarfe WC; Farman TT; Green DB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Feb; 85(2):203-9. PubMed ID: 9503457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [In vitro comparison of root canal preparation with step-back technique and GT rotary file--a nickel-titanium engine driven rotary instrument system].
    Krajczár K; Tóth V; Nyárády Z; Szabó G
    Fogorv Sz; 2005 Jun; 98(3):119-23. PubMed ID: 16108416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Length of endodontic files measured in digital radiographs with and without noise-suppression filters: an ex-vivo study.
    Brüllmann DD; Röhrig B; Sulayman SL; Schulze R
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2011 Mar; 40(3):170-6. PubMed ID: 21346084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Impact of scale standardization on images of digital radiography systems.
    Versteeg CH; Sanderink GC; Geraets WG; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Nov; 26(6):337-43. PubMed ID: 9482009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Diagnostic performance of radiovisiography in combination with a diagnosis assisting program versus conventional radiography and radiovisiography in basic mode and with magnification.
    Forner Navarro L; Llena Puy MC; García Godoy F
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2008 Apr; 13(4):E261-5. PubMed ID: 18379453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A comparison of D-, E-, and F-speed conventional intraoral radiographic films in endodontic measurement.
    Sheaffer JC; Eleazer PD; Scheetz JP; Clark SJ; Farman AG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2002 Mar; 93(3):337-40. PubMed ID: 11925545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Radiovisiography for imaging root canals: an in vitro comparison with conventional radiography.
    Shearer AC; Horner K; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 1990 Oct; 21(10):789-94. PubMed ID: 2082410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of nickel-titanium and stainless steel hand-file instrumentation using computed tomography.
    Gambill JM; Alder M; del Rio CE
    J Endod; 1996 Jul; 22(7):369-75. PubMed ID: 8935064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Landmark identification on direct digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: a human skull study.
    Schulze RK; Gloede MB; Doll GM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Dec; 122(6):635-42. PubMed ID: 12490875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The effects of developer age on diagnostic accuracy: a study using assessment of endodontic file length.
    Syriopoulos K; Sanderink GC; Velders XL; van Ginkel FC; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Sep; 28(5):311-5. PubMed ID: 10490751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Reduction in size of digital images: does it lead to less detectability or loss of diagnostic information?
    Versteeg CH; Sanderink GC; Lobach SR; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 Mar; 27(2):93-6. PubMed ID: 9656873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Psychophysical properties of a new F-speed intraoral film.
    Mastoris M; Yoshiura K; Welander U; Tsiklakis K; Papadakis E; Li G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 May; 33(3):158-63. PubMed ID: 15371315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An evaluation of Kodak Ektaspeed periapical film for use in endodontics.
    Girsch WJ; Matteson SR; McKee MN
    J Endod; 1983 Jul; 9(7):282-8. PubMed ID: 6579184
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. RVG-ui: a sensor to rival direct-exposure intra-oral x-ray film.
    Farman AG; Farman TT
    Int J Comput Dent; 1999 Jul; 2(3):183-96. PubMed ID: 11351483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Radiation dosage reduction in general dental practice using digital intraoral radiographic systems.
    Hayakawa Y; Shibuya H; Ota Y; Kuroyanagi K
    Bull Tokyo Dent Coll; 1997 Feb; 38(1):21-5. PubMed ID: 9566150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Endodontic complications of root canal therapy performed by dental students with stainless-steel K-files and nickel-titanium hand files.
    Pettiette MT; Metzger Z; Phillips C; Trope M
    J Endod; 1999 Apr; 25(4):230-34. PubMed ID: 10425945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The impact of different viewing conditions on radiological file and working length measurement.
    Orafi I; Worthington HV; Qualtrough AJ; Rushton VE
    Int Endod J; 2010 Jul; 43(7):600-7. PubMed ID: 20636518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.