You are here

Home » Content

SPONGİÖZ KEMİK DEFEKTLERİNİN RADYOLOJİK GÖRÜNÜMLERİNE KOMPAKT KEMİĞİN ETKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ

EVALUATION ÖF THE EFFECT OF BONE CORTEX ON RADIOGRAPHIC VISUALISATION OF CANCELOUS BONE DEFECTS

Journal Name:

  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 1996

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The difficulties about the cancelous bone defects has not been solved. In the presented study the effect of the bone cortex was evaluated by long cone and angle-bisecting technique. Although the effect of the bone cortex has been observed in angle bisecting technique the defects have monitered similarly to their original dimensions with long cone technique. Despite the facts in representation of the real structure by dried skuls; in monitoring the bone lesions long cone technique may be useful.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Spongöz kemik defektlerinirt izlenmesindeki zorluklar henüz giderilememiş, tir. Çalışmamızda oluşturulan kemik defeküeri paralel ve açı ortay tekniği ile değerlendirilmiştir. Kompakt kemiğin etkisi aç] ortay tekniğinde hissedilirken paralel teknikte boyudar gerçeklerine yakın büyüklükte izlenmiştir, Kurukafa kemiklerinin gerçek yapıyı temsi ündeki problemler göfcörtüne alınarak yapılacak değerlendirmede paralel tekniğin kemik değişiklik!erinin gözlenmesinde yararlı olabileceğini düşünmekteyiz.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-spongioz-kemik-defektlerinin-radyolojik-gorunumlerine-kompakt-kemigin-etkisinin-incelenmesi.pdf
  • 2
12-14
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

film guality assurance step-wedge test. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 1986; 62: 449-58.
2. Dubrez B, Jacot S, Qmasoni G. Reliability of a paraileing instrument for dental radiographs. Orai Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80: 358-64.
3. Duinkerke ASH, Poel AC, Daesburg WH. Variations in measurements of human periapicial structures in radiographs. Archs Oral Biol, 1973; 18; 745-50.
4. Duinkerke ASH, Poel AC. An analysts of apparently identical dental radiographs. Oral Surg, 1974; 38: 962-7.
5. Duinkerke ASH, Poel AC, Doesburg WH. Variations in Ihe interpretation of periapical radiolucencies. Oral Surg 1975;40:414-22.
6. Duinkerke ASH, PbeJ AC, Linden FP, Doesburg WH, Lemmens WAJG. Evaluation of a technique for standardized periapical radiographs. Oral Surg 1977; 44: 645-51.
7. Dunn SM, Stelt RFR. Recognizing invariant geometric structure dental radiographs. Dentamaxillofac Radiol 1992; 21: 142-7,
8. Graf JM, Mounir A, Payot P, Cimasoni G. A simple pamleling instrument for superimposing radiographs of the molar regions. Oral Sur Oral Med Oral Pathol 1988; 66: 502 6.
9. Philips JD. A study of the radiographic appearence of osseous defects on panoramic and conventional films. Oral Surg 1973; 36: 745-9.
10. Reddy MS. Radiographic methods in the evaluation of periodontal therapy. J Periodontol 1992; 63; 1078-84.
1 1. Stevenson AG. Bone scanning as an aid to diagnosis. British Journal Of Oral Surgery. 1977 1978; 15: 231-9.
12. Zappa U, Simona C, Graf H. In vivo determination of radiographic projection errors produced by a novel film holder and an x-ray beam manipulator. J Clin Perilodontal 1991; 62: 674-83.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com