<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Suni debuts Suni3D HD a small field of view Cone Beam CT</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marcilan.com/2010/07/suni-debuts-suni3d-hd-a-small-field-of-view-cone-beam-ct/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marcilan.com/2010/07/suni-debuts-suni3d-hd-a-small-field-of-view-cone-beam-ct/</link>
	<description>Maxillofacial Radiology Cone Beam CT Interactive Learning And Navigation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:29:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wisam Al-Rawi</title>
		<link>http://www.marcilan.com/2010/07/suni-debuts-suni3d-hd-a-small-field-of-view-cone-beam-ct/comment-page-1/#comment-917</link>
		<dc:creator>Wisam Al-Rawi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2011 04:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marcilan.com/?p=3668#comment-917</guid>
		<description>Hi Janesen,
I have not compared both very close but the similarities include: small field of view, lower radiation dose, and relatively close selling price with Suni being more affordable last time I checked. However, unless you are an Endodontist or interested in small FOV go for those machines. My preference these days is to have small + medium FOVs CBCT machine for Endo, Perio + implant planning in multiple quadrants. Wisam</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Janesen,<br />
I have not compared both very close but the similarities include: small field of view, lower radiation dose, and relatively close selling price with Suni being more affordable last time I checked. However, unless you are an Endodontist or interested in small FOV go for those machines. My preference these days is to have small + medium FOVs CBCT machine for Endo, Perio + implant planning in multiple quadrants. Wisam</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jrichins</title>
		<link>http://www.marcilan.com/2010/07/suni-debuts-suni3d-hd-a-small-field-of-view-cone-beam-ct/comment-page-1/#comment-881</link>
		<dc:creator>Jrichins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marcilan.com/?p=3668#comment-881</guid>
		<description>The article stated that: &quot;It can be considered an alternative for the Kodak 9000, Gendex CB500, or Planmeca ProMax Small just in case you are considering to buy one.&quot;  Could you explain why the Suni machine is an alternative to these other systems?  Cost, radiation dose, image quality?  I&#039;m particularly interested in differences between the Suni and Kodak 9000 machine, which also has a focused field of view.  Thanks, Jansen</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article stated that: &#8220;It can be considered an alternative for the Kodak 9000, Gendex CB500, or Planmeca ProMax Small just in case you are considering to buy one.&#8221;  Could you explain why the Suni machine is an alternative to these other systems?  Cost, radiation dose, image quality?  I&#8217;m particularly interested in differences between the Suni and Kodak 9000 machine, which also has a focused field of view.  Thanks, Jansen</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

