Accès gratuit
| Numéro |
Radioprotection
Volume 53, Numéro 4, October-December 2018
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Page(s) | 287 - 291 | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/radiopro/2018036 | |
| Publié en ligne | 16 novembre 2018 | |
- Al Najjar A, Colosi D, Dauer LT, Prins R, Patchell G, Branets I, Goren AD, Faber RD. 2013. Comparison of adult and child radiation equivalent doses from 2 dental cone-beam computed tomography units. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 143(6): 784–792. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Bornstein MM, Scarfe WC, Vaughn VM, Jacobs R. 2014. Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: a systematic review focusing on guidelines, indications, and radiation dose risks. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 29(Suppl): 55–77. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brenner DJ. 2002. Estimating cancer risks from pediatric CT: going from the qualitative to the quantitative. Pediatr. Radiol. 32: 228–233. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- De Vos W, Casselman J, Swennen GR. 2009. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 38(6): 609–625. [Google Scholar]
- Doyle P, Martin CJ, Robertson J. 2006. Techniques for measurement of dose width product in panoramic dental radiography. Br. J. Radiol. 79: 142–147. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. 2012. Radiation Protection no172, Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial radiology (Evidence-based guidelines). ISSN 1681–6803. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher DR, Fahey FH. 2017. Appropriate use of effective dose in radiation protection and risk assessment. Health Phys. 113(2): 102–109. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Granlund CM, Lith A, Molander B, Gröndahl K, Hansen K, Ekestubbe A. 2012. Frequency of errors and pathology in panoramic images of young orthodontic patients. Eur. J. Orthod. 34(4): 452–457. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Guerrero ME, Jacobs R, Loubele M, Schutyser F, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. 2006. State-of-the-art on cone beam CT imaging for preoperative planning of implant placement. Clin. Oral Invest. 10: 1–7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- ICRU. 2005. Patient dosimetry for X-rays used in medical imaging (Report 74). J. ICRU 5(2): iv–vi. [Google Scholar]
- Ludlow JB, Timothy R, Walker C, Hunter R, Benavides E, Samuelson DB, Scheske MJ. 2015. Effective dose of dental CBCT – a meta analysis of published data and additional data for nine CBCT units. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. 44: 20140197. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Manousaridis G, Koukorava C, Hourdakis CJ, Kamenopoulou V, Yakoumakis E, Tsiklakis K. 2015. Establishment of diagnostic reference levees for dental panoramic radiography in Greece. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 165(1–4): pp. 111–114. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Muhammed AH, Manson-Hing LR. 1982. A comparison of panoramic and intraoral radiographic surveys in evaluating a dental clinic population. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 54(1): 108–117. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pauwels R. 2015. Cone beam CT for dental and maxillofacial imaging: dose matters. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 165(1–4): 156–161. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Pauwels R, Theodorakou C, Walker A, Bosmans H, Jacobs R, Horner K, Bogaerts R, The SEDENTEXCT Project Consortium. 2012. Dose distribution for dental cone beam CT and its implication for defining a dose index. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. 41: 583–593. [Google Scholar]
- Pierce DA, Preston DL. 2000. Radiation-related cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat. Res. 154: 178–186. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, Käser Y, Peltola J, Kortesniemi M. 2009. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. 38: 367–378. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams JR, Montgomery A. 2000. Measurement of dose in panoramic dental radiology. Br. J. Radiol. 73: 1002–1006. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.
Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.
Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.