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.
176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22580927)
1. Comparison of biogenerically reconstructed and waxed-up complete occlusal surfaces with respect to the original tooth morphology. Kollmuss M; Jakob FM; Kirchner HG; Ilie N; Hickel R; Huth KC Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Apr; 17(3):851-7. PubMed ID: 22580927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Fully automatic CAD design of the occlusal morphology of partial crowns compared to dental technicians' design. Litzenburger AP; Hickel R; Richter MJ; Mehl AC; Probst FA Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Mar; 17(2):491-6. PubMed ID: 22451342 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Efficiency of a mathematical model in generating CAD/CAM-partial crowns with natural tooth morphology. Ender A; Mörmann WH; Mehl A Clin Oral Investig; 2011 Apr; 15(2):283-9. PubMed ID: 20143242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of chairside and laboratory CAD/CAM to conventional produced all-ceramic crowns regarding morphology, occlusion, and aesthetics. Kollmuss M; Kist S; Goeke JE; Hickel R; Huth KC Clin Oral Investig; 2016 May; 20(4):791-7. PubMed ID: 26245275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparing the precision of reproducibility of computer-aided occlusal design to conventional methods. Muric A; Gokcen Röhlig B; Ongul D; Evlioglu G J Prosthodont Res; 2019 Jan; 63(1):110-114. PubMed ID: 30446412 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of computer generated occlusal surfaces with functionally waxed-on surfaces. Ellerbrock C; Kordass B Int J Comput Dent; 2011; 14(1):23-31. PubMed ID: 21657123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical outcomes of three different crown systems with CAD/CAM technology. Batson ER; Cooper LF; Duqum I; Mendonça G J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Oct; 112(4):770-7. PubMed ID: 24980739 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Fit of pressed crowns fabricated from two CAD-CAM wax pattern process plans: A comparative in vitro study. Shamseddine L; Mortada R; Rifai K; Chidiac JJ J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 28024815 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of Different CAM Strategies on the Fit of Partial Crown Restorations: A Digital Three-dimensional Evaluation. Zimmermann M; Valcanaia A; Neiva G; Mehl A; Fasbinder D Oper Dent; 2018; 43(5):530-538. PubMed ID: 29630483 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Loss of tooth structure associated with preparation for two monolithic CAD-CAM complete coverage restorations. Sadid-Zadeh R; Farsaii A; Goodarzi A; Davis EL J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Sep; 120(3):403-408. PubMed ID: 29724561 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of margin discrepancy of complete gold crowns fabricated using printed, milled, and conventional hand-waxed patterns. Munoz S; Ramos V; Dickinson DP J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):89-94. PubMed ID: 27866698 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Fracture strength of CAD/CAM posterior ceramic crowns after manual enhancement of occlusal morphology. Passos L; Torrealba Y; Linke B; Street A; Passos S Int J Comput Dent; 2018; 21(3):191-200. PubMed ID: 30264048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. In vitro evaluation of marginal discrepancy of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated with different CAD-CAM systems. Hamza TA; Sherif RM J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jun; 117(6):762-766. PubMed ID: 27836145 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Computer modeling of occlusal surfaces of posterior teeth with the CICERO CAD/CAM system. Olthoff LW; Van Der Zel JM; De Ruiter WJ; Vlaar ST; Bosman F J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Aug; 84(2):154-62. PubMed ID: 10946332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of production method on surface roughness, marginal and internal fit, and retention of cobalt-chromium single crowns. Lövgren N; Roxner R; Klemendz S; Larsson C J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):95-101. PubMed ID: 28024818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of the Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns made from Conventional, Digital, or Conventional/Digital Techniques. Al Hamad KQ; Al Rashdan BA; Al Omari WM; Baba NZ J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e580-e586. PubMed ID: 30091168 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Trueness of four different milling procedures used in dental CAD/CAM systems. Kirsch C; Ender A; Attin T; Mehl A Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Mar; 21(2):551-558. PubMed ID: 27469100 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of the contact surface pattern between virtual and milled Cerec 3D full-ceramic crowns. Hartung F; Kordass B Int J Comput Dent; 2006 Apr; 9(2):129-36. PubMed ID: 16955650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Occlusal contact and clearance of posterior implant-supported single crowns designed by two different methods: a self-controlled study. He M; Pu T; Ding Q; Sun Y; Wang P; Sun Y; Zhang L BMC Oral Health; 2023 Mar; 23(1):151. PubMed ID: 36918877 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]