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 *

584 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25032765)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 6. Effects of implant angulation, impression material, and variation in arch curvature width on implant transfer model accuracy.
    Akalin ZF; Ozkan YK; Ekerim A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(1):149-57. PubMed ID: 23377060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Three-dimensional accuracy of a digitally coded healing abutment implant impression system.
    Ng SD; Tan KB; Teoh KH; Cheng AC; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):927-36. PubMed ID: 25032774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of accuracy of hexed and nonhexed pickup impression copings in a multiple variable impression setup for recording multiple straight and angulated implant positions: An
    Kaur T; Singla S; Kumar L
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2023; 23(1):21-29. PubMed ID: 36588371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Comparison of the accuracy of different impression procedures in case of multiple and angulated implants : Accuracy of impressions in multiple and angulated implants.
    Richi MW; Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S; Ozan O
    Head Face Med; 2020 May; 16(1):9. PubMed ID: 32366261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Effect of implant angulation, connection length, and impression material on the dimensional accuracy of implant impressions: an in vitro comparative study.
    Sorrentino R; Gherlone EF; Calesini G; Zarone F
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2010 May; 12 Suppl 1():e63-76. PubMed ID: 19438937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Impression Techniques for Implant Restorations.
    Moura RV; Kojima AN; Saraceni CHC; Bassolli L; Balducci I; Özcan M; Mesquita AMM
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e530-e535. PubMed ID: 29717518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In vitro comparison of accuracy between conventional and digital impression using elastomeric materials and two intra-oral scanning devices.
    Palantza E; Sykaras N; Zoidis P; Kourtis S
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 Aug; 36(8):1179-1198. PubMed ID: 38534043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of implant divergence on the accuracy of definitive casts created from traditional and digital implant-level impressions: an in vitro comparative study.
    Lin WS; Harris BT; Elathamna EN; Abdel-Azim T; Morton D
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(1):102-9. PubMed ID: 25615919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of the accuracy of Biomet 3i Encode Robocast Technology and conventional implant impression techniques.
    Howell KJ; McGlumphy EA; Drago C; Knapik G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(1):228-40. PubMed ID: 23377070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 30.