These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12131881)
1. Application of a 3-dimensional measurement system to complete denture impressions. Rignon-Bret C; Dupuis R; Gaudy JF J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jun; 87(6):603-12. PubMed ID: 12131881 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study. Papaspyridakos P; Benic GI; Hogsett VL; White GS; Lal K; Gallucci GO Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Jun; 23(6):676-681. PubMed ID: 21631595 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of simulated intraoral variables on the accuracy of a photogrammetric imaging technique for complete-arch implant prostheses. Bratos M; Bergin JM; Rubenstein JE; Sorensen JA J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Aug; 120(2):232-241. PubMed ID: 29559220 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of accuracy of the wash impression technique to rebase and replace the resilient part of a soft-lined denture. Burrell CJ; Russell MD; Stewart J J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Mar; 65(3):408-13. PubMed ID: 2056460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. On Comparing Two Different Tray-Holding Techniques for Edentulous Maxillary Impressions. Rignon-Bret C; Mushegyan V; Naveau A Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(2):169-72. PubMed ID: 26929958 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparative study of impression procedures for distal extension removable partial dentures. Madihalli AU; Tavane PN; Yadav NS; Abraham S; Reddy PM; Baiju G J Contemp Dent Pract; 2011 Sep; 12(5):333-8. PubMed ID: 22269192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Randomised Controlled Study Comparing the Anterior Mandibular Labio-Lingual Neutral Zone Position in Edentulous Subjects With and Without Their Maxillary Denture In-Situ. Birtles A; Craddock H; Kang J; Hyde TP Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2015 Jun; 23(2):78-84. PubMed ID: 26373201 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. An in vitro comparison of photogrammetric and conventional complete-arch implant impression techniques. Bergin JM; Rubenstein JE; Mancl L; Brudvik JS; Raigrodski AJ J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Oct; 110(4):243-51. PubMed ID: 24079558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations. Al-Abdullah K; Zandparsa R; Finkelman M; Hirayama H J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Aug; 110(2):90-100. PubMed ID: 23929370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods. Cho SH; Schaefer O; Thompson GA; Guentsch A J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):310-5. PubMed ID: 25682531 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary denture displacement during reline impression procedure. Javid NS; Michael CG; Mohammed HA; Colaizzi FA J Prosthet Dent; 1985 Aug; 54(2):232-7. PubMed ID: 3903120 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]