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 *

434 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23879869)

  • 1. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation, and depth.
    Giménez B; Özcan M; Martínez-Rus F; Pradíes G
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2015 Jan; 17 Suppl 1():e54-64. PubMed ID: 23879869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth.
    Giménez B; Özcan M; Martínez-Rus F; Pradíes G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):853-62. PubMed ID: 25032765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy of two digital implant impression systems based on confocal microscopy with variations in customized software and clinical parameters.
    Giménez B; Pradíes G; Martínez-Rus F; Özcan M
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 25615916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Active Triangulation Technology With Blue Light for Implants: Effect of Clinically Relevant Parameters.
    Giménez B; Özcan M; Martínez-Rus F; Pradíes G
    Implant Dent; 2015 Oct; 24(5):498-504. PubMed ID: 26057777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study.
    Lee H; Ercoli C; Funkenbusch PD; Feng C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):107-13. PubMed ID: 18262011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An In Vitro Study of Factors Influencing the Performance of Digital Intraoral Impressions Operating on Active Wavefront Sampling Technology with Multiple Implants in the Edentulous Maxilla.
    Gimenez-Gonzalez B; Hassan B; Özcan M; Pradíes G
    J Prosthodont; 2017 Dec; 26(8):650-655. PubMed ID: 26934046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Implant Impressions: Effect of Interimplant Distance in an Edentulous Arch.
    Tan MY; Yee SHX; Wong KM; Tan YH; Tan KBC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(2):366–380. PubMed ID: 30521661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes.
    Papaspyridakos P; Gallucci GO; Chen CJ; Hanssen S; Naert I; Vandenberghe B
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Apr; 27(4):465-72. PubMed ID: 25682892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure.
    Menini M; Setti P; Pera F; Pera P; Pesce P
    Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Apr; 22(3):1253-1262. PubMed ID: 28965251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of the Clinical Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Dental Implant Impressions.
    Rutkunas V; Gedrimiene A; Adaskevicius R; Al-Haj Husain N; Özcan M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2020 Nov; 28(4):173-181. PubMed ID: 32673469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of impressions with different impression materials in angulated implants.
    Reddy S; Prasad K; Vakil H; Jain A; Chowdhary R
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2013; 16(3):279-84. PubMed ID: 23771446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques.
    Alsharbaty MHM; Alikhasi M; Zarrati S; Shamshiri AR
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Apr; 28(4):e902-e908. PubMed ID: 29423969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study.
    Amin S; Weber HP; Finkelman M; El Rafie K; Kudara Y; Papaspyridakos P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2017 Nov; 28(11):1360-1367. PubMed ID: 28039903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital evaluation of the accuracy of impression techniques and materials in angulated implants.
    Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S; Ozan O; Ozcelik TB; Yagiz A
    J Dent; 2014 Dec; 42(12):1551-9. PubMed ID: 25446736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Precision and Accuracy of a Digital Impression Scanner in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation.
    Pesce P; Pera F; Setti P; Menini M
    Int J Prosthodont; 2018; 31(2):171-175. PubMed ID: 29518813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and related variables: A systematic review.
    Zhang YJ; Shi JY; Qian SJ; Qiao SC; Lai HC
    Int J Oral Implantol (Berl); 2021 May; 14(2):157-179. PubMed ID: 34006079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The effect of impression technique and implant angulation on the impression accuracy of external- and internal-connection implants.
    Mpikos P; Kafantaris N; Tortopidis D; Galanis C; Kaisarlis G; Koidis P
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(6):1422-8. PubMed ID: 23189292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Scanning accuracy with splinted and unsplinted implant scan bodies for the edentulous arch at implant level: an in vitro study.
    Garbacea A; Alqahtani AF; Goodacre B; Alhelal A; Lozada J; Kattadiyil MT
    J Oral Implantol; 2022 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 35816623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant-supported dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Flügge T; van der Meer WJ; Gonzalez BG; Vach K; Wismeijer D; Wang P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Oct; 29 Suppl 16():374-392. PubMed ID: 30328182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.