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 *

261 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20884936)

  • 1. The role of cone-beam computed tomography in the planning and placement of implants.
    Worthington P; Rubenstein J; Hatcher DC
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2010 Oct; 141 Suppl 3():19S-24S. PubMed ID: 20884936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reliability of implant placement after virtual planning of implant positions using cone beam CT data and surgical (guide) templates.
    Nickenig HJ; Eitner S
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2007; 35(4-5):207-11. PubMed ID: 17576068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Impact of operator experience on the accuracy of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical templates: an in vitro study.
    Cushen SE; Turkyilmaz I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Apr; 109(4):248-54. PubMed ID: 23566606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A clinically relevant accuracy study of computer-planned implant placement in the edentulous maxilla using mucosa-supported surgical templates.
    Verhamme LM; Meijer GJ; Boumans T; de Haan AF; Bergé SJ; Maal TJ
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2015 Apr; 17(2):343-52. PubMed ID: 23879524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of restoratively projected and surgically acceptable virtual implant position for mandibular overdentures.
    Scarfe W; Vaughn WS; Farman AG; Harris BT; Paris MM
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(1):111-8. PubMed ID: 22299087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An open system approach for surgical guide production.
    Abboud M; Orentlicher G
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Dec; 69(12):e519-24. PubMed ID: 22117708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Digitally designed surgical guides for placing extraoral implants in the mastoid area.
    Van der Meer WJ; Vissink A; Raghoebar GM; Visser A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):703-7. PubMed ID: 22616066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of a newly developed open-source system for dental implant planning.
    Dreiseidler T; Tandon D; Ritter L; Neugebauer J; Mischkowski RA; Scheer M; Zöller JE
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(1):128-37. PubMed ID: 22299089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of the difference in accuracy between implant placement by virtual planning data and surgical guide templates versus the conventional free-hand method - a combined in vivo - in vitro technique using cone-beam CT (Part II).
    Nickenig HJ; Wichmann M; Hamel J; Schlegel KA; Eitner S
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2010 Oct; 38(7):488-93. PubMed ID: 19939691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The impact of CBCT imaging when placing dental implants in the anterior edentulous mandible: a before-after study.
    Shelley AM; Ferrero A; Brunton P; Goodwin M; Horner K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2015; 44(4):20140316. PubMed ID: 25472617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A clinically relevant validation method for implant placement after virtual planning.
    Verhamme LM; Meijer GJ; Boumans T; Schutyser F; Bergé SJ; Maal TJ
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2013 Nov; 24(11):1265-72. PubMed ID: 22905668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Registration accuracy of three-dimensional surface and cone beam computed tomography data for virtual implant planning.
    Ritter L; Reiz SD; Rothamel D; Dreiseidler T; Karapetian V; Scheer M; Zöller JE
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Apr; 23(4):447-52. PubMed ID: 21488966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The CT/CBCT-based team approach to care. Part I: Identiying the implant patient and prosthetic options.
    Tischler M; Ganz SD
    Dent Today; 2012 Aug; 31(8):74, 76, 78-9. PubMed ID: 22970599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Incorporating digital scans of diagnostic casts into computed tomography for virtual implant treatment planning.
    Yilmaz B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Aug; 114(2):178-81. PubMed ID: 25935078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Integrating three-dimensional digital technologies for comprehensive implant dentistry.
    Patel N
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2010 Jun; 141 Suppl 2():20S-4S. PubMed ID: 20516111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone beam CT-derived template-based implant placement.
    Behneke A; Burwinkel M; Behneke N
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Apr; 23(4):416-23. PubMed ID: 22092586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The combination of digital surface scanners and cone beam computed tomography technology for guided implant surgery using 3Shape implant studio software: a case history report.
    Lanis A; Álvarez Del Canto O
    Int J Prosthodont; 2015; 28(2):169-78. PubMed ID: 25822304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of the match between cone beam computed tomography and model scan data in template-guided implant planning: A prospective controlled clinical study.
    Schnutenhaus S; Gröller S; Luthardt RG; Rudolph H
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2018 Aug; 20(4):541-549. PubMed ID: 29691987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Accuracy of three different types of stereolithographic surgical guide in implant placement: an in vitro study.
    Turbush SK; Turkyilmaz I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Sep; 108(3):181-8. PubMed ID: 22944314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic surgical guide.
    Sarment DP; Sukovic P; Clinthorne N
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(4):571-7. PubMed ID: 12939011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.