El-Angbawi AM, McIntyre GT, Bearn DR, Thomson DJ. Film and digital periapical radiographs for the measurement of apical root shortening. J Clin Exp Dent. 2012;4(5):e281-5.

 

doi:10.4317/jced.50872

http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.4317/jced.50872

 

References

1. Hartsfield JK, Everett ET, Al-Qawasmi RA. Genetic factors in external apical root resorption and orthodontic treatment. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2004;15:115-22.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/154411130401500205

PMid: 15059946

 

2. Sameshima, GT, Asgarifar KO. Assessment of root resorption and root shape: periapical vs. panoramic films. Angle Orthod. 2001;71:185-9.

PMid:11407770

 

3. Berkhout E, Sanderink G, Van der Stelt P. Digital intra-oral radiography in dentistry. Diagnostic efficacy and dose considerations. Oral Radiol. 2003;19:1-13.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02493286

 

4. Wenzel A, Møystad A. Work flow with digital intraoral radiography: A systematic review. Acta Odontol Scand. 2010;68:106-14.

http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00016350903514426

PMid:20141365

 

5. Bhaskaran V, Qualtrough AJ, Rushton VE, Worthington HV, Horner K. A laboratory comparison of three imaging systems for image quality and radiation exposure characteristics. Int Endod J. 2005;38:645-52.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00998.x

PMid:16104978

 

6. Schmitd LB, Lima TD, Chinellato LEM, Bramante CM, Garcia RB, De Moraes IG, et al. Comparison of radiographic measurements obtained with conventional and indirect digital imaging during endodontic treatment. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008;16:167-70.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572008000200016

PMid:19089211

 

7. Dudic A, Giannopoulou C, Martinez M, Montet X, Kiliaridis S. Diagnostic accuracy of digitized periapical radiographs validated against micro-computed tomography scanning in evaluating orthodontically induced apical root resorption. Eur J Oral Sci. 2008;116:467-72.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00559.x

PMid:18821990

 

8. Versteeg CH, Sanderink GC, Van der Stelt P. Efficacy of digital intra-oral radiography in clinical dentistry. J Dent. 1997;25:215-24.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(96)00026-7

PMid: 9175348

 

9. Kamburoğlu K, Barenboim S, Kaffe I. Comparison of conventional film with different digital and digitally filtered images in the detection of simulated internal resorption cavities--an ex vivo study in human cadaver jaws. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008;105:790-7.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.05.030

PMid:17942339

 

10. Westphalen V, Gomes de Moraes I, Westphalen FH, Martins WD, Souza PH. Conventional and digital radiographic methods in the detection of simulated external root resorptions: a comparative study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:233-5.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/65487937

PMid:15533976

 

11. Levander E, Bajka R, Malmgren O. Early radiographic diagnosis of apical root resorption during orthodontic treatment: a study of maxillary incisors. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20:57-63.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/20.4.427

PMid: 9558765

 

12. Borg E, Källqvist A, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl H. Film and digital radiography for detection of simulated root resorption cavities. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;86:110-4.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(98)90159-7

PMid: 9690255

 

13. Cederberg RA, Tidwell E, Frederiksen NL, Benson BW. Endodontic working length assessment. Comparison of storage phosphor digital imaging and radiographic film. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998;85:325-8.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(98)90017-8

PMid: 9540092

 

14. Ong EY, Pitt Ford TR. Comparison of radiovisiography with radiographic film in root length determination. Int Endod J. 1995;28:25-9.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1995.tb00152.x

PMid:7642325

 

15. Velders X. [100 years of x-rays: increase in image quality of intra-oral radiographs, decrease in patient exposure]. Ned TijdschrTandheelkd. 1995;102:471-5.

PMid:11836815