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 *

214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25749089)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Accuracy of a self-perforating impression tray for dental implants.
    Marotti J; Tortamano P; Castilho TR; Steagall W; Wolfart S; Haselhuhn K
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Oct; 112(4):843-8. PubMed ID: 24787129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A comparison of profilometer and AutoCAD software techniques in evaluation of implant angulation in vitro.
    Assunção WG; Gomes EA; Tabata LF; Gennari-Filho H
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):618-22. PubMed ID: 18807556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Displacement of implant components from impressions to definitive casts.
    Kim S; Nicholls JI; Han CH; Lee KW
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(5):747-55. PubMed ID: 17066636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Accuracy of impression techniques for implants. Part 2 - comparison of splinting techniques.
    Filho HG; Mazaro JV; Vedovatto E; Assunção WG; dos Santos PH
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Feb; 18(2):172-6. PubMed ID: 19178624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials.
    De La Cruz JE; Funkenbusch PD; Ercoli C; Moss ME; Graser GN; Tallents RH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 12426505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Effect of Implant Angulation and Depth on the Accuracy of Casts Using the Open Tray Splinted Impression Technique.
    Taduri T; Mathur S; Upadhyay S; Patel K; Shah M
    J Oral Implantol; 2021 Dec; 47(6):447-454. PubMed ID: 33270885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study.
    Pujari M; Garg P; Prithviraj DR
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Accuracy of different definitive impression techniques with the all-on-4 protocol.
    Ozan O; Hamis O
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Jun; 121(6):941-948. PubMed ID: 30661881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Accuracy of definitive casts using 4 implant-level impression techniques in a scenario of multi-implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival alignment levels.
    Martínez-Rus F; García C; Santamaría A; Özcan M; Pradíes G
    Implant Dent; 2013 Jun; 22(3):268-76. PubMed ID: 23615660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Evaluation of accuracy of various impression techniques and impression materials in recording multiple implants placed unilaterally in a partially edentulous mandible- An
    Parameshwari G; Chittaranjan B; Sudhir N; Anulekha-Avinash CK; Taruna M; Ramureddy M
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2018 Apr; 10(4):e388-e395. PubMed ID: 29750102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Can transfer type and implant angulation affect impression accuracy? A 3D in vitro evaluation.
    Farronato D; Pasini PM; Campana V; Lops D; Azzi L; Manfredini M
    Odontology; 2021 Oct; 109(4):884-894. PubMed ID: 34075492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Implant cast accuracy as a function of impression techniques and impression material viscosity.
    Walker MP; Ries D; Borello B
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):669-74. PubMed ID: 18807563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Accuracy of impressions for internal-connection implant prostheses with various divergent angles.
    Jang HK; Kim S; Shim JS; Lee KW; Moon HS
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(5):1011-5. PubMed ID: 22010084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review.
    Papaspyridakos P; Chen CJ; Gallucci GO; Doukoudakis A; Weber HP; Chronopoulos V
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):836-45. PubMed ID: 25032763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Accuracy of Impression Techniques for Dental Implants Placed in Five Different Orientations.
    Kim HS; Lee JH; Lee SY
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(5):997-1002. PubMed ID: 36170315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.