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 *

229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27767256)

  • 1. Digital Evaluation of Three Splinting Materials Used to Fabricate Verification Jigs for Full-Arch Implant Prostheses: A Comparative Study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Kim YJ; Finkelman M; El-Rafie K; Weber HP
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2017 Apr; 29(2):102-109. PubMed ID: 27767256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Prosthesis accuracy of fit on 3D-printed casts versus stone casts: A comparative study in the anterior maxilla.
    Abdeen L; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2022 Dec; 34(8):1238-1246. PubMed ID: 36415927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Accuracy of the Different Materials Used to Fabricate a Verification Jig of Implant-Supported Fixed Complete Dental Prostheses: An In Vitro Study.
    Aljohani MS; Bukhari HA; Alshehri M; Alamoudi A
    Cureus; 2022 Sep; 14(9):e29794. PubMed ID: 36340520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Benic GI; Hogsett VL; White GS; Lal K; Gallucci GO
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Jun; 23(6):676-681. PubMed ID: 21631595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Full-arch implant fixed prostheses: a comparative study on the effect of connection type and impression technique on accuracy of fit.
    Papaspyridakos P; Hirayama H; Chen CJ; Ho CH; Chronopoulos V; Weber HP
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Sep; 27(9):1099-105. PubMed ID: 26374268
    [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. Effect of feldspathic porcelain layering on the marginal fit of zirconia and titanium complete-arch fixed implant-supported frameworks.
    Yilmaz B; Alshahrani FA; Kale E; Johnston WM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jul; 120(1):71-78. PubMed ID: 29426786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ratios of Cantilever Lengths and Anterior-Posterior Spreads of Definitive Hybrid Full-Arch, Screw-Retained Prostheses: Results of a Clinical Study.
    Drago C
    J Prosthodont; 2018 Jun; 27(5):402-408. PubMed ID: 27416302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Digital vs Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Retrospective Analysis of 36 Edentulous Jaws.
    Papaspyridakos P; De Souza A; Finkelman M; Sicilia E; Gotsis S; Chen YW; Vazouras K; Chochlidakis K
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Apr; 32(4):325-330. PubMed ID: 35524647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of printed casts generated from digital implant impressions versus stone casts from conventional implant impressions: A comparative in vitro study.
    Alshawaf B; Weber HP; Finkelman M; El Rafie K; Kudara Y; Papaspyridakos P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Aug; 29(8):835-842. PubMed ID: 29926977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of splinted and nonsplinted impression techniques on the accuracy of fit of fixed implant prostheses in edentulous patients: a comparative study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Lal K; White GS; Weber HP; Gallucci GO
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(6):1267-72. PubMed ID: 22167432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Biomechanical comparison of axial and tilted implants for mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses.
    Kim KS; Kim YL; Bae JM; Cho HW
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(5):976-84. PubMed ID: 22010079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Nov; 92(5):470-6. PubMed ID: 15523336
    [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. In vitro fit of CAD-CAM complete arch screw-retained titanium and zirconia implant prostheses fabricated on 4 implants.
    Al-Meraikhi H; Yilmaz B; McGlumphy E; Brantley W; Johnston WM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Mar; 119(3):409-416. PubMed ID: 28720339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reverse scan body: The scan pattern affects the fit of complete-arch prototype prostheses.
    Papaspyridakos P; Bedrossian EA; Ntovas P; Kudara Y; Bokhary A; Chochlidakis K
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(S2):186-191. PubMed ID: 37721306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.