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 *

617 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27406138)

  • 1. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization.
    Güth JF; Runkel C; Beuer F; Stimmelmayr M; Edelhoff D; Keul C
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Jun; 21(5):1445-1455. PubMed ID: 27406138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing-generated dental casts based on intraoral scanner data.
    Patzelt SB; Bishti S; Stampf S; Att W
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2014 Nov; 145(11):1133-40. PubMed ID: 25359645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A new method for the evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in vitro.
    Güth JF; Edelhoff D; Schweiger J; Keul C
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Sep; 20(7):1487-94. PubMed ID: 26454734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions for Whole Upper Jaws, Including Full Dentitions and Palatal Soft Tissues.
    Gan N; Xiong Y; Jiao T
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0158800. PubMed ID: 27383409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons.
    Renne W; Ludlow M; Fryml J; Schurch Z; Mennito A; Kessler R; Lauer A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 28024822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.
    Flügge TV; Schlager S; Nelson K; Nahles S; Metzger MC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Sep; 144(3):471-8. PubMed ID: 23992820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Comparative analysis of 3D data accuracy of single tooth and full dental arch captured by different intraoral and laboratory digital impression systems].
    Ryakhovskiy AN; Kostyukova VV
    Stomatologiia (Mosk); 2016; 95(4):65-70. PubMed ID: 27636766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions.
    Ender A; Zimmermann M; Attin T; Mehl A
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Sep; 20(7):1495-504. PubMed ID: 26547869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of single-abutment digital cast obtained using intraoral and cast scanners.
    Lee JJ; Jeong ID; Park JY; Jeon JH; Kim JH; Kim WC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Feb; 117(2):253-259. PubMed ID: 27666500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study.
    Imburgia M; Logozzo S; Hauschild U; Veronesi G; Mangano C; Mangano FG
    BMC Oral Health; 2017 Jun; 17(1):92. PubMed ID: 28577366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Rydén J; Thor A
    J Dent; 2018 Feb; 69():110-118. PubMed ID: 29246490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of full-arch digital impressions: an in vitro and in vivo comparison.
    Keul C; Güth JF
    Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Feb; 24(2):735-745. PubMed ID: 31134345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Scan time and accuracy of full-arch scans with intraoral scanners: a comparative study on conditions of the intraoral head-simulator and the hand-held model].
    Wu MT; Tang SX; Peng LY; Han YT; Su YC; Wang X
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Jun; 56(6):570-575. PubMed ID: 34098673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro.
    Ender A; Zimmermann M; Mehl A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 30848250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of complete-arch model using an intraoral video scanner: An in vitro study.
    Jeong ID; Lee JJ; Jeon JH; Kim JH; Kim HY; Kim WC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Jun; 115(6):755-9. PubMed ID: 26794703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations.
    Park JM; Kim RJ; Lee KW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):113-120. PubMed ID: 31027953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of trueness and precision of two intraoral scanners and a conventional impression: an in vivo clinical study.
    Jorquera GJ; Sampaio CS; Bozzalla A; Hirata R; Sánchez JP
    Quintessence Int; 2021 Oct; 52(10):904-910. PubMed ID: 34410071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients.
    Kuhr F; Schmidt A; Rehmann P; Wöstmann B
    J Dent; 2016 Dec; 55():68-74. PubMed ID: 27717754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions.
    Carbajal Mejía JB; Wakabayashi K; Nakamura T; Yatani H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):392-399. PubMed ID: 28222873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of Three Digitization Methods for the Dental Arch with Various Tooth Preparation Designs: An In Vitro Study.
    Oh KC; Lee B; Park YB; Moon HS
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 30427097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 31.