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 *

73 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9442606)

  • 1. Effect of axial plane deviation on cross-sectional height in reformatted computed tomography of the mandible.
    Kohavi D; Bar-Ziv J; Marmary Y
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 May; 26(3):189-91. PubMed ID: 9442606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of mandibular positioning on preimplant site measurement of the mandible in reformatted CT.
    Kim KD; Jeong HG; Choi SH; Hwang EH; Park CS
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2003 Apr; 23(2):177-83. PubMed ID: 12710821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Computed tomography for dental implants: the influence of the gantry angle and mandibular positioning on the bone height and width.
    Dantas JA; Montebello Filho A; Campos PS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 Jan; 34(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 15709099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of computerized tomography for the evaluation of mandibular sites prior to implant placement.
    Sforza NM; Franchini F; Lamma A; Botticelli S; Ghigi G
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2007 Dec; 27(6):589-95. PubMed ID: 18092453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of reformatted CT image for measuring the pre-implant site: analysis of the image distortion related to the gantry angle change.
    Choi SC; Ann CH; Choi HM; Heo MS; Lee SS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jul; 31(4):273-7. PubMed ID: 12087445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Interpretation of linear and computed tomograms in the assessment of implant recipient sites.
    Todd AD; Gher ME; Quintero G; Richardson AC
    J Periodontol; 1993 Dec; 64(12):1243-9. PubMed ID: 8106953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cross-sectional imaging of the jaws for dental implant treatment: accuracy of linear tomography using a panoramic machine in comparison with reformatted computed tomography.
    Naitoh M; Kawamata A; Iida H; Ariji E
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(1):107-12. PubMed ID: 11858566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The role of objective plane angulation on the mandibular image using cross-sectional tomography.
    Naitoh M; Katsumata A; Kubota Y; Okumura S; Hayashi H; Ariji E
    J Oral Implantol; 2006; 32(3):117-21. PubMed ID: 16836175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measurement accuracy of reconstructed 2-D images obtained by multi-slice helical computed tomography.
    Naitoh M; Katsumata A; Nohara E; Ohsaki C; Ariji E
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2004 Oct; 15(5):570-4. PubMed ID: 15355399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Oblique lateral cephalometric radiographs of the mandible in implantology: usefulness and accuracy of the technique in height measurements of mandibular bone in vivo.
    Verhoeven JW; Cune MS
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2000 Feb; 11(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 11168192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Conventional spiral and low-dose computed mandibular tomography for dental implant planning.
    Ekestubbe A
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 138():1-82. PubMed ID: 10635103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Osteometry of the mandible performed using dental MR imaging.
    Nasel CJ; Pretterklieber M; Gahleitner A; Czerny C; Breitenseher M; Imhof H
    AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 1999 Aug; 20(7):1221-7. PubMed ID: 10472975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Standardization of Temporal Bone CT Planes across a Multisite Academic Institution.
    Guenette JP; Hsu L; Czajkowski B; Nunez DB
    AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 2019 Aug; 40(8):1383-1387. PubMed ID: 31272961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Validation of spiral computed tomography for dental implants.
    Cavalcanti MG; Yang J; Ruprecht A; Vannier MW
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 Nov; 27(6):329-33. PubMed ID: 10895630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Trabecular bone volume and bone mineral density in the mandible.
    Lindh C; Petersson A; Klinge B; Nilsson M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Mar; 26(2):101-6. PubMed ID: 9442625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Three-dimensional accuracy of implant placement in a computer-assisted navigation system.
    Chiu WK; Luk WK; Cheung LK
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(3):465-70. PubMed ID: 16796293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Linear measurement accuracy of dental CT images obtained by 64-slice multidetector row CT: the effects of mandibular positioning and pitch factor at CT scanning.
    Kamiyama Y; Nakamura S; Abe T; Munakata M; Nomura Y; Watanabe H; Akiyama M; Kurabayashi T
    Implant Dent; 2012 Dec; 21(6):496-501. PubMed ID: 23080557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Basic study of the measurement of bone mineral content of cortical and cancellous bone of the mandible by computed tomography.
    Iwashita Y
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jul; 29(4):209-15. PubMed ID: 10918453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Precision of cortical bone reconstruction based on 3D CT scans.
    Wang J; Ye M; Liu Z; Wang C
    Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2009 Apr; 33(3):235-41. PubMed ID: 19217257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants.
    Ersoy AE; Turkyilmaz I; Ozan O; McGlumphy EA
    J Periodontol; 2008 Aug; 79(8):1339-45. PubMed ID: 18672982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.