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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

132 related items for PubMed ID: 38288316

  • 21. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography with modified gray-scale range versus digital periapical radiography for the assessment of bone-implant interface gaps.
    Kajan ZD, Abbasi S, Khosravifard N, Sigaroudi AK, Motevasseli S.
    Oral Radiol; 2022 Jan; 38(1):80-88. PubMed ID: 33893899
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Effect of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Field of View and Acquisition Frame on the Detection of Chemically Simulated Peri-Implant Bone Loss In Vitro.
    Pinheiro LR, Scarfe WC, Augusto de Oliveira Sales M, Gaia BF, Cortes AR, Cavalcanti MG.
    J Periodontol; 2015 Oct; 86(10):1159-65. PubMed ID: 26156676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Diagnostic accuracy of small volume cone beam computed tomography and intraoral periapical radiography for the detection of simulated external inflammatory root resorption.
    Durack C, Patel S, Davies J, Wilson R, Mannocci F.
    Int Endod J; 2011 Feb; 44(2):136-47. PubMed ID: 21083575
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Accuracy of peri-implant bone evaluation using cone beam CT, digital intra-oral radiographs and histology.
    Ritter L, Elger MC, Rothamel D, Fienitz T, Zinser M, Schwarz F, Zöller JE.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2014 Feb; 43(6):20130088. PubMed ID: 24786136
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Accuracy of cone beam dental CT, intraoral digital and conventional film radiography for the detection of periapical lesions. An ex vivo study in pig jaws.
    Stavropoulos A, Wenzel A.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2007 Mar; 11(1):101-6. PubMed ID: 17048029
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Misfit detection in implant-supported prostheses of different compositions by periapical radiography and cone beam computed tomography: An in vitro study.
    de-Azevedo-Vaz SL, Araujo-Siqueira C, Carneiro VC, Oliveira ML, Azeredo RA.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Aug; 126(2):205-213. PubMed ID: 32723499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Detection of crestal radiolucencies around dental implants: an in vitro experimental study.
    Sirin Y, Horasan S, Yaman D, Basegmez C, Tanyel C, Aral A, Guven K.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Jul; 70(7):1540-50. PubMed ID: 22698290
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Comparative analysis of the accuracy of periapical radiography and cone-beam computed tomography for diagnosing complex endodontic pathoses using a gold standard reference - A prospective clinical study.
    G K, Singh N, Yadav R, Duhan J, Tewari S, Gupta A, Sangwan P, Mittal S.
    Int Endod J; 2021 Sep; 54(9):1448-1461. PubMed ID: 33904603
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Comparison of intraoral digital radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in the measurement of periodontal bone defects.
    Abdinian M, Yaghini J, Jazi L.
    Dent Med Probl; 2020 Sep; 57(3):269-273. PubMed ID: 33074598
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Accuracy evaluation of cone beam computed tomography applied to measure peri-implant bone thickness in living patients: an ex vivo and in vivo experiment.
    Lan Y, Huang X, Fan M, Yu H, Xie Z, Zhou Y.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Oct; 26(10):6347-6359. PubMed ID: 35802190
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Interpretation of chemically created periapical lesions using 2 different dental cone-beam computerized tomography units, an intraoral digital sensor, and conventional film.
    Ozen T, Kamburoğlu K, Cebeci AR, Yüksel SP, Paksoy CS.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Mar; 107(3):426-32. PubMed ID: 18996725
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Assessment of buccal marginal alveolar peri-implant and periodontal defects using a cone beam CT system with and without the application of metal artefact reduction mode.
    Kamburoglu K, Kolsuz E, Murat S, Eren H, Yüksel S, Paksoy CS.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013 Mar; 42(8):20130176. PubMed ID: 23956236
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Peri-implant bone tissue assessment by comparing the outcome of intra-oral radiograph and cone beam computed tomography analyses to the histological standard.
    Corpas Ldos S, Jacobs R, Quirynen M, Huang Y, Naert I, Duyck J.
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2011 May; 22(5):492-9. PubMed ID: 21143531
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. A comparison of cone beam computed tomography and periapical radiography for the detection of vertical root fractures in nonendodontically treated teeth.
    Brady E, Mannocci F, Brown J, Wilson R, Patel S.
    Int Endod J; 2014 Aug; 47(8):735-46. PubMed ID: 24182358
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Do the number of zirconia implants and the thickness of CBCT image reconstruction affect the detection of peri-implant bone defect? A diagnostic accuracy ex vivo study.
    da Fonte JBM, Fontenele RC, Farias-Gomes A, Ruiz DC, Andrade-Bortoletto MFS, Sousa Melo SL, Freitas DQ.
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 Nov; 35(11):1485-1492. PubMed ID: 39072795
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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