ライフサイエンスコーパス: CEJ

1 CEJ-AC distance in postmenopausal women is the result of

2 CEJ-AC distances were determined from digitized vertical

3 CPG-1/CEJ-1 and CPG-2 are expressed during embryonic developme

4 ability, but simultaneous depletion of CPG-1/CEJ-1 and CPG-2 resulted in multinucleated single-cell e

5 r bone crest to cemento-enamel junction (ABC-CEJ) distances >2 mm.

6 rease (P </=0.05) was observed in CEJ-AP and CEJ-JE distances.

7 s and distances from the stent to the GM and CEJ in the test and control sites.

8 PD and CEJ-GM percentage of exact agreement measurements (95% C

9 namel junction (CEJ) to bone crest (CEJ-BC), CEJ to base of the defect (CEJ-BD), and BC to BD (BC-BD)

10 ers recorded included the following: CEJ-BC, CEJ-BD, BC-BD distances, and radiographic defect angle.

11 Regarding M1, the distance between CEJ and the alveolar crest was significantly more corona

12 and the mesial and distal distances between CEJ and bone level were measured.

13 sp tip to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), CEJ to root apex, and cusp tip to root apex.

14 were significantly greater than the control CEJ-ABC distances.

15 cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to bone crest (CEJ-BC), CEJ to base of the defect (CEJ-BD), and BC to B

16 e crest (CEJ-BC), CEJ to base of the defect (CEJ-BD), and BC to BD (BC-BD); and depth of 2- and 3-wal

17 The mean difference in distance CEJ-BL was 0.1 mm (mesial) and 0.3 mm (distal) and great

18 The mean distance CEJ-BL increased significantly up to age 45 (r2=0.07; be

19 The mean distance CEJ-bone level was 1.4 mm (S.D.+/-0.7) in the 15 to 24 a

20 to-enamel junction, alveolar-crest distance (CEJ-AC, as measured on digitized vertical bite-wing radi

21 The mean widths at FE, CEJ, MRW, and DRW were, respectively, 5.53 +/- 0.45 mm,

22 parameters recorded included the following: CEJ-BC, CEJ-BD, BC-BD distances, and radiographic defect

23 reement by as much as 57% for PD and 68% for CEJ-GM.

24 ificant increase (P </=0.05) was observed in CEJ-AP and CEJ-JE distances.

25 iables accounted for 19% of the variation in CEJ-AC distances.

26 cclusal stent of the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) as a reference landmark has been the method of choi

27 coronal root at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) in 95% of teeth and focal resorption of intact enam

28 istance between the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and alveolar bone crest and the thickness of facial

29 stances between the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and alveolar process (AP) crest, as well as between

30 istance between the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and the alveolar bone level (BL) and 2) the prevale

31 istance between the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and the alveolar bone level (BL).

32 edge as near to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) as possible.

33 within 1 mm of the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) for 58% of the sites treated.

34 was coronal to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) in both groups, gingival margins were at a more api

35 6 mm apical to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) of the maxillary fourth premolar (PM4; thin bone ov

36 rgical distances of cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to bone crest (CEJ-BC), CEJ to base of the defect (

37 e distance from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the alveolar bone crest (ABC) at 20 molar sites.

38 g the distance from cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the alveolar bone crest (ABC) at 20 molar sites.

39 e distance from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the alveolar crest (P = 0.66 for initial measure

40 graft and from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the EOR, the CEJ to the mandibular border, and t

41 dth of GR below the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) was also determined.

42 rom cusp tip to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), CEJ to root apex, and cusp tip to root apex.

43 s measured from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ).

44 gival margin to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ-GM [mm]) were obtained in a pilot study to design a

45 A significantly larger CEJ-bone crest was measured in smokers (P <0.05) and pat

46 roof (FE); 2) cemento-enamel junction level (CEJ); 3) mesial root width (MRW); and 4) distal root wid

47 he MF to other anatomical landmarks were: MF-CEJ = 15.52 +/- 2.37 mm, MF to the most apical portion o

48 rette smoking were independent predictors of CEJ-AC distance (P < or =0.05).

49 A high variation of CEJ-bone crest (0.8 to 7.2 mm) was detected.

50 Baseline PD and surgical CEJ-BD were statistically significant predictors of CAL

51 R, the CEJ to the mandibular border, and the CEJ to the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN).

52 r process (AP) crest, as well as between the CEJ and junctional epithelium (JE) level, were measured;

53 emento-enamel junction (CEJ) to the EOR, the CEJ to the mandibular border, and the CEJ to the inferio

54 The average bone thickness at 3 mm from the CEJ for the maxillary right central incisor was 1.41 mm

55 ificant difference for the distance from the CEJ to the base of the defect, with CBVT measurements un

56 was administered, and a measurement from the CEJ to the bone crest was made by sounding through the a

57 tudy demonstrates that most FORL involve the CEJ, and the presence of focal lesions at this site sugg

58 thin bone over root); 2) 6 mm apical to the CEJ of PM2 (dehiscence defect); and 3) 10 mm distoapical

59 nce defect); and 3) 10 mm distoapical to the CEJ of the maxillary canine (edentulous ridge).

60 stent to the gingival margin (GM) and to the CEJ.

61 backward stepwise regression analysis, with CEJ-AC distance as the dependent variable.

62 dentify those variables most associated with CEJ-AC distance.

63 efined as having two sites per quadrant with CEJ-ABC distances that were significantly greater than t