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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9690255)

  • 21. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT images of different voxel resolutions used to detect simulated small internal resorption cavities.
    Kamburoğlu K; Kursun S
    Int Endod J; 2010 Sep; 43(9):798-807. PubMed ID: 20609023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure?
    Berkhout WE; Beuger DA; Sanderink GC; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 15140814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Diagnosis of external root resorption using TACT (tuned-aperture computed tomography).
    Nance RS; Tyndall D; Levin LG; Trope M
    Endod Dent Traumatol; 2000 Feb; 16(1):24-8. PubMed ID: 11202852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Radiographic assessment of simulated external root resorption cavities in maxillary incisors.
    Goldberg F; De Silvio A; Dreyer C
    Endod Dent Traumatol; 1998 Jun; 14(3):133-6. PubMed ID: 9863423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Evaluation of simulated external root resorptions with digital radiography and digital subtraction radiography.
    Ono E; Medici Filho E; Faig Leite H; Tanaka JL; De Moraes ME; De Melo Castilho JC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Mar; 139(3):324-33. PubMed ID: 21392686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison between cone-beam computed tomography and intraoral digital radiography for assessment of tooth root lesions.
    Kumar V; Gossett L; Blattner A; Iwasaki LR; Williams K; Nickel JC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Jun; 139(6):e533-41. PubMed ID: 21640865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Detectability of chemically induced periapical lesions by limited cone beam computed tomography, intra-oral digital and conventional film radiography.
    Sogur E; Baksi BG; Gröndahl HG; Lomcali G; Sen BH
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Oct; 38(7):458-64. PubMed ID: 19767516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Diagnostic accuracy of cone beam computed tomography with different resolution settings for external root resorption].
    Xie XY; Jia SM; Sun ZH; Zhang ZY
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2019 Feb; 51(1):75-79. PubMed ID: 30773548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The effect of dose reduction on the detection of anatomical structures on panoramic radiographs.
    Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Reinert S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Jul; 35(4):271-7. PubMed ID: 16798925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison between intraoral indirect and conventional film-based imaging for the detection of dental root fractures: an ex vivo study.
    Shintaku WH; Venturin JS; Noujeim M; Dove SB
    Dent Traumatol; 2013 Dec; 29(6):445-9. PubMed ID: 23566073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Accuracy in Detecting Artificial Root Resorption in Panoramic Radiography versus Tomosynthetic Panoramic Radiographs.
    Rahmel S; Schulze RKW
    J Endod; 2019 May; 45(5):634-639.e2. PubMed ID: 30905574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Assessment of external root resorption using digital subtraction radiography.
    Kravitz LH; Tyndall DA; Bagnell CP; Dove SB
    J Endod; 1992 Jun; 18(6):275-84. PubMed ID: 1402585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Accuracy of Digital Subtraction Radiography in the Detection of Vertical Root Fractures.
    Queiroz PM; Nascimento HA; da Paz TD; Anacleto FN; Freitas DQ
    J Endod; 2016 Jun; 42(6):896-9. PubMed ID: 27080116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Approximal caries depth assessment with storage phosphor versus film radiography. Evaluation of the caries-specific Oslo enhancement procedure.
    Svanaes DB; Moystad A; Larheim TA
    Caries Res; 2000; 34(6):448-53. PubMed ID: 11093017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effects of different exposure values on diagnostic accuracy of digital images.
    Pfeiffer P; Schmage P; Nergiz I; Platzer U
    Quintessence Int; 2000 Apr; 31(4):257-60. PubMed ID: 11203933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effects of the automatic exposure compensation on the proximal caries diagnosis.
    Yoshiura K; Nakayama E; Shimizu M; Goto TK; Chikui T; Kawazu T; Okamura K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 May; 34(3):140-4. PubMed ID: 15897283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Digital subtraction radiography for assessment of simulated root resorption cavities. Performance of conventional and reverse contrast modes.
    Hintze H; Wenzel A; Andreasen FM; Swerin I
    Endod Dent Traumatol; 1992 Aug; 8(4):149-54. PubMed ID: 1291302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effects of imaging system and exposure on accurate detection of the second mesio-buccal canal in maxillary molar teeth.
    Ramamurthy R; Scheetz JP; Clark SJ; Farman AG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2006 Dec; 102(6):796-802. PubMed ID: 17138184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of root perforation, external resorption and fractures using cone-beam computed tomography, panoramic radiography and conventional & digital periapical radiography.
    Takeshita WM; Chicarelli M; Iwaki LC
    Indian J Dent Res; 2015; 26(6):619-26. PubMed ID: 26888242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Digital camera resolution and proximal caries detection.
    Prapayasatok S; Janhom A; Verochana K; Pramojanee S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Jul; 35(4):253-7. PubMed ID: 16798921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.