DIGORA OPTIME PRICE WINDOWS
Digora Toto® images were also evaluated through the Digora for Windows 2.6® software.
DIGORA OPTIME PRICE SOFTWARE
Images were viewed under standardized conditions by 3 calibrated examiners using the respective dedicated software (Digora for Windows 2.6® and Scanora®). The teeth were radiographed with two digital receptors: the Digora Optime (14.3 lp mm‐1) and the Digora Toto (26.3 lp mm‐1). Thirty‐two had horizontal root fractures created and were mounted in dry human mandibles. Materials and Methods Sixty‐four extracted single‐root human teeth were used. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of number of line pairs in digital intra‐oral radiography on the detection accuracy of horizontal root fractures. Nejaim, Yuri Gomes, Amanda Farias Silva, Emmanuel João Nogueira Leal da Groppo, Francisco Carlos Haiter Neto, FranciscoĪim Line pairs are the unit for measurement of resolution and are related to the spatial quality of the system. İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ.Ītatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi.The influence of number of line pairs in digital intra‐oral radiography on the detection accuracy of horizontal root fractures The influence of number of line pairs in digital intra‐oral radiography on the detection accuracy. %J Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi
%T İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ %0 Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ T2 - Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi T1 - İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ "İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ". "İNTRAORAL DİJİTAL GÖRÜNTÜLEME SİSTEMLERİ"Ītatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2011 (2011 Journal = Ītatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi Diagnostic efficacy and dose considerations. Digital intra-oral radiography in dentistry. Berkhout E, Sanderink G, van der Stelt P.The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure? Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004 33: 1–5. Berkhout WE, Beuger DA, Sanderink GCH, van der Stelt PF.A laboratory comparison of three imaging systems for image quality and radiation exposure characteristics. Bhaskaran V, Qualtrough AJ, Rushton VE, Worthington HV, Horner K.Effective and quality- controlled use of digital radiography in dental practice. Better imaging: the advantages of digital radiography.J Am Dent Assoc2008 139 7S-13S. Quantitative assessment of a new intra-oral digital imaging system.
Subjective image quality of solid-state and photostimulable phosphor systems for digital intra-oral radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2005 100: 603–8. Physical properties and ease of operation of a wireless intraoral x-ray sensor. Tsuchida R, Araki K, Endo A, Funahashi I, Okano T.The uses of digital radiography in dental practice. In practice: how going digital will affect the dental office. Farman AG, Levato CM, Gane D, Scarfe WC.Comparison of complementary metal oxide semiconductor and charge-coupled device intraoral X-ray detectors using subjective image quality. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000 89: 356-362. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital imaging using CCD and CMOS-APS sensors with E- speed film in the detection of periapical bony lesions. Paurazas SB, Geist JR, Pink FE, Hoen MM, Steiman HR.Digital radiographic imaging: is the dental practice ready? J Am Dent Assoc 2008 139: 477-481. Work flow with digital intraoral radiography: a systematic review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989 68: 238-242.