English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

To compare the outcome of mini implant placement by four different methods: blind placement, a single periapical radiograph (PA), a single panoramic radiograph, and a small-volume cone-beam computed tomography (SV-CBCT). Our hypothesis was that SV-CBCT, with its high resolution, low radiation dose, and three-dimensional depiction of area of interest would yield superior diagnostic information in assessing the potential anchorage site compared to currently used methods that often result in undesired root perforations.

A comparative study between currently used methods and Small Volume-Cone Beam Tomography for surgical placement of mini implants