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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

490 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17980951)

  • 1. Direct mechanical data acquisition of dental impressions for the manufacturing of CAD/CAM restorations.
    Quaas S; Rudolph H; Luthardt RG
    J Dent; 2007 Dec; 35(12):903-8. PubMed ID: 17980951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness.
    Persson AS; Odén A; Andersson M; Sandborgh-Englund G
    Dent Mater; 2009 Jul; 25(7):929-36. PubMed ID: 19264353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression.
    Luthardt RG; Loos R; Quaas S
    Int J Comput Dent; 2005 Oct; 8(4):283-94. PubMed ID: 16689029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations.
    Rudolph H; Salmen H; Moldan M; Kuhn K; Sichwardt V; Wöstmann B; Luthardt RG
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2016; 24(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 27008261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An innovative method for evaluation of the 3-D internal fit of CAD/CAM crowns fabricated after direct optical versus indirect laser scan digitizing.
    Luthardt RG; Bornemann G; Lemelson S; Walter MH; Hüls A
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(6):680-5. PubMed ID: 15686096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Computer-aided analysis of the influence of digitizing and surfacing on the accuracy in dental CAD/CAM technology.
    Rudolph H; Luthardt RG; Walter MH
    Comput Biol Med; 2007 May; 37(5):579-87. PubMed ID: 16844107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.
    Flügge TV; Schlager S; Nelson K; Nahles S; Metzger MC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Sep; 144(3):471-8. PubMed ID: 23992820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Three-dimensional fit of CAD/CAM-made zirconia copings.
    Moldovan O; Luthardt RG; Corcodel N; Rudolph H
    Dent Mater; 2011 Dec; 27(12):1273-8. PubMed ID: 21983002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Qualitative computer aided evaluation of dental impressions in vivo.
    Luthardt RG; Koch R; Rudolph H; Walter MH
    Dent Mater; 2006 Jan; 22(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 16040117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Randomized controlled clinical study on the accuracy of two-stage putty-and-wash impression materials.
    Haim M; Luthardt RG; Rudolph H; Koch R; Walter MH; Quaas S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(3):296-302. PubMed ID: 19548415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A three-dimensional evaluation of a laser scanner and a touch-probe scanner.
    Persson A; Andersson M; Oden A; Sandborgh-Englund G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Mar; 95(3):194-200. PubMed ID: 16543016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A novel computer-aided method to fabricate a custom one-piece glass fiber dowel-and-core based on digitized impression and crown preparation data.
    Chen Z; Li Y; Deng X; Wang X
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Jun; 23(4):276-83. PubMed ID: 24118182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of CNC-milling on the marginal and internal fit of dental ceramics: a pilot study.
    Schaefer O; Kuepper H; Thompson GA; Cachovan G; Hefti AF; Guentsch A
    Dent Mater; 2013 Aug; 29(8):851-8. PubMed ID: 23743092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ; Hertrampf K
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality.
    Birnbaum NS; Aaronson HB
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2008 Oct; 29(8):494, 496, 498-505. PubMed ID: 18935788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An in vitro evaluation of fit of zirconium-oxide-based ceramic four-unit fixed partial dentures, generated with three different CAD/CAM systems, before and after porcelain firing cycles and after glaze cycles.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F
    J Prosthodont; 2008 Dec; 17(8):621-6. PubMed ID: 18798783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of mechanical digitizing with a CAD/CAM system for fixed restorations.
    Luthardt RG; Sandkuhl O; Herold V; Walter MH
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(2):146-51. PubMed ID: 11843451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study.
    Caputi S; Varvara G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Apr; 99(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 18395537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Marginal adaptation of full-coverage CAD/CAM restorations: in vitro study using a non-destructive method.
    Romeo E; Iorio M; Storelli S; Camandona M; Abati S
    Minerva Stomatol; 2009 Mar; 58(3):61-72. PubMed ID: 19357612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 25.