1123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28039903)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy.
Marghalani A; Weber HP; Finkelman M; Kudara Y; El Rafie K; Papaspyridakos P
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Apr; 119(4):574-579. PubMed ID: 28927923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions.
Albayrak B; Sukotjo C; Wee AG; Korkmaz İH; Bayındır F
J Prosthodont; 2021 Feb; 30(2):163-170. PubMed ID: 32935894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions-An In Vitro Study.
Ribeiro P; Herrero-Climent M; Díaz-Castro C; Ríos-Santos JV; Padrós R; Mur JG; Falcão C
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2018 Jul; 15(8):. PubMed ID: 30060540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In vitro comparative study between complete arch conventional implant impressions and digital implant scans with scannable pick-up impression copings.
Conejo J; Yoo TH; Atria PJ; Fraiman H; Blatz MB
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Mar; 131(3):475.e1-475.e7. PubMed ID: 38182453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study.
Vandeweghe S; Vervack V; Dierens M; De Bruyn H
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2017 Jun; 28(6):648-653. PubMed ID: 27150731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of different impression coping and scan body designs on the accuracy of conventional versus digital implant impressions: An in vitro study.
Alkindi S; Hamdoon Z; Aziz AM
J Dent; 2024 Jul; 146():105045. PubMed ID: 38714241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38534043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 3D Accuracy of a Conventional Method Versus Three Digital Scanning Strategies for Completely Edentulous Maxillary Implant Impressions.
Blanco-Plard A; Hernandez A; Pino F; Vargas N; Rivas-Tumanyan S; Elias A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2023 Dec; 38(6):1211-1219. PubMed ID: 38085753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Digital workflow: In vitro accuracy of 3D printed casts generated from complete-arch digital implant scans.
Papaspyridakos P; Chen YW; Alshawaf B; Kang K; Finkelman M; Chronopoulos V; Weber HP
J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Nov; 124(5):589-593. PubMed ID: 31959396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital Versus Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Prospective Study on 16 Edentulous Maxillae.
Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P; Tsigarida A; Romeo D; Chen YW; Natto Z; Ercoli C
J Prosthodont; 2020 Apr; 29(4):281-286. PubMed ID: 32166793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Do digital impressions have a greater accuracy for full-arch implant-supported reconstructions compared to conventional impressions? An
Shaikh M; Lakha T; Kheur S; Qamri B; Kheur M
J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2022; 22(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 36511075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies: An in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation.
Huang R; Liu Y; Huang B; Zhang C; Chen Z; Li Z
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2020 Jul; 31(7):625-633. PubMed ID: 32181919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
