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 *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9777586)

  • 1. Effect of projective aspects variations on estimates of changes in bone mass using digital subtraction radiography.
    Loftin R; Webber R; Horton R; Tyndall D; Moriarty J
    J Periodontal Res; 1998 Aug; 33(6):352-8. PubMed ID: 9777586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of bone chip orientation on quantitative estimates of changes in bone mass using digital subtraction radiography.
    Mol A; Dunn SM
    J Periodontal Res; 2003 Jun; 38(3):296-302. PubMed ID: 12753368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An in-vitro evaluation of a dental subtraction radiography system using bone chips on dried human mandibles.
    Rawlinson A; Ellwood RP; Davies RM
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Mar; 26(3):138-42. PubMed ID: 10100038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The detection of in vitro produced periodontal bone lesions by conventional radiography and photographic subtraction radiography using observers and quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Janssen PT; van Palenstein Helderman WH; van Aken J
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Jul; 16(6):335-41. PubMed ID: 2668346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Semiautomated image registration for digital subtraction radiography.
    Byrd V; Mayfield-Donahoo T; Reddy MS; Jeffcoat MK
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Apr; 85(4):473-8. PubMed ID: 9574960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography for the determination of small changes in bone thickness: an in vitro study.
    Christgau M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G; Kolbeck C; Wenzel A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Apr; 85(4):462-72. PubMed ID: 9574959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The performance of projective standardization for digital subtraction radiography.
    Mol A; Dunn SM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Sep; 96(3):373-82. PubMed ID: 12973297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity of a new digital subtraction system: an in vitro study.
    Dove SB; McDavid WD; Hamilton KE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Jun; 89(6):771-6. PubMed ID: 10846136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation by digital subtraction radiography of induced changes in the bone density of the female rat mandible.
    Mahl CR; Fontanella V
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Dec; 37(8):438-44. PubMed ID: 19033428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Problems around the in vitro and in vivo application of quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Janssen PT; van Aken J
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 May; 16(5):323-30. PubMed ID: 2656771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Computer-assisted densitometric image analysis of digital subtraction images: in vivo error of the method and effect of thresholding.
    Brägger U; Bürgin W; Fourmousis I; Schmid G; Schild U; Lang NP
    J Periodontol; 1998 Sep; 69(9):967-74. PubMed ID: 9776024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy in detecting bone lesions in vitro with conventional and subtracted direct digital imaging.
    Stassinakis A; Brägger U; Stojanovic M; Bürgin W; Lussi A; Lang NP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Nov; 24(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 9161167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impact of JPEG lossy image compression on quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Fidler A; Likar B; Pernus F; Skaleric U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):106-12. PubMed ID: 12076050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effects of beam hardening on digital subtraction radiography.
    Webber RL; Tzukert A; Ruttimann U
    J Periodontal Res; 1989 Jan; 24(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 2524570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quantitative analysis of bone density in direct digital radiographs evaluated by means of computerized analysis of digital images.
    Morea C; Dominguez GC; Coutinho A; Chilvarquer I
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2010 Sep; 39(6):356-61. PubMed ID: 20729185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quantitative analysis of periodontal defects in a skull model by subtraction radiography using a digital imaging device.
    Young SJ; Chaibi MS; Graves DT; Majzoub Z; Boustany F; Cochran D; Nummikoski P
    J Periodontol; 1996 Aug; 67(8):763-9. PubMed ID: 8866315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Standardized lateral oblique projection of the mandible for digital subtraction radiography.
    Araki K; Kitamori H; Yoshiura K; Okuda H; Ohki M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1992 May; 21(2):88-92. PubMed ID: 1397463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Computer-assisted subtraction radiography in periodontal diagnosis.
    Gröndahl K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1987; 50():1-44. PubMed ID: 3321498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Digital subtraction radiography for detecting cortical and cancellous bone changes in the periapical region.
    Tyndall DA; Kapa SF; Bagnell CP
    J Endod; 1990 Apr; 16(4):173-8. PubMed ID: 2074408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Clinical validation of a new subtraction radiography technique for periodontal bone loss detection.
    Nummikoski PV; Steffensen B; Hamilton K; Dove SB
    J Periodontol; 2000 Apr; 71(4):598-605. PubMed ID: 10807124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.