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.
321 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28863884)
1. How Accurate Are Implant Surgical Guides Produced With Desktop Stereolithographic 3-Dimentional Printers? Deeb GR; Allen RK; Hall VP; Whitley D; Laskin DM; Bencharit S J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Dec; 75(12):2559.e1-2559.e8. PubMed ID: 28863884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. In Vivo Tooth-Supported Implant Surgical Guides Fabricated With Desktop Stereolithographic Printers: Fully Guided Surgery Is More Accurate Than Partially Guided Surgery. Bencharit S; Staffen A; Yeung M; Whitley D; Laskin DM; Deeb GR J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2018 Jul; 76(7):1431-1439. PubMed ID: 29550378 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Accuracy of three different types of stereolithographic surgical guide in implant placement: an in vitro study. Turbush SK; Turkyilmaz I J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Sep; 108(3):181-8. PubMed ID: 22944314 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Accuracy and precision of 3D-printed implant surgical guides with different implant systems: An in vitro study. Yeung M; Abdulmajeed A; Carrico CK; Deeb GR; Bencharit S J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jun; 123(6):821-828. PubMed ID: 31653399 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. Arisan V; Karabuda ZC; Ozdemir T J Periodontol; 2010 Jan; 81(1):43-51. PubMed ID: 20059416 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement. Ozan O; Turkyilmaz I; Ersoy AE; McGlumphy EA; Rosenstiel SF J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Feb; 67(2):394-401. PubMed ID: 19138616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. In Vivo Accuracy of Implant Placement Using a Full Digital Planning Modality and Stereolithographic Guides. Skjerven H; Riis UH; Herlofsson BB; Ellingsen JE Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(1):124-132. PubMed ID: 30695088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In vitro comparison of guided versus freehand implant placement: use of a new combined TRIOS surface scanning, Implant Studio, CBCT, and stereolithographic virtually planned and guided technique. Tan PLB; Layton DM; Wise SL Int J Comput Dent; 2018; 21(2):87-95. PubMed ID: 29967901 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery Using an Intraoral Scanner and Desktop 3D-Printed Tooth-Supported Guides. D'haese R; Vrombaut T; Hommez G; De Bruyn H; Vandeweghe S Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(3):479-484. PubMed ID: 35727238 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy of Implants Placed with Surgical Guides: Thermoplastic Versus 3D Printed. Bell CK; Sahl EF; Kim YJ; Rice DD Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2018; 38(1):113-119. PubMed ID: 29240212 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Accuracy of implant position when placed using static computer-assisted implant surgical guides manufactured with two different optical scanning techniques: a randomized clinical trial. Kiatkroekkrai P; Takolpuckdee C; Subbalekha K; Mattheos N; Pimkhaokham A Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2020 Mar; 49(3):377-383. PubMed ID: 31543382 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical application of stereolithographic surgical guides for implant placement: preliminary results. Di Giacomo GA; Cury PR; de Araujo NS; Sendyk WR; Sendyk CL J Periodontol; 2005 Apr; 76(4):503-7. PubMed ID: 15857088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Accuracy of a chairside, fused deposition modeling three-dimensional-printed, single tooth surgical guide for implant placement: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Sun Y; Ding Q; Yuan F; Zhang L; Sun Y; Xie Q Clin Oral Implants Res; 2022 Oct; 33(10):1000-1009. PubMed ID: 35852859 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of the Accuracy of Implant Position Using Surgical Guides Fabricated by Additive and Subtractive Techniques. Henprasert P; Dawson DV; El-Kerdani T; Song X; Couso-Queiruga E; Holloway JA J Prosthodont; 2020 Jul; 29(6):534-541. PubMed ID: 32147893 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants. Ersoy AE; Turkyilmaz I; Ozan O; McGlumphy EA J Periodontol; 2008 Aug; 79(8):1339-45. PubMed ID: 18672982 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An evaluation of virtually planned and 3D-printed stereolithographic surgical guides from CBCT and digital scans: An in vitro study. Shah NP; Khanna A; Pai AR; Sheth VH; Raut SR J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):436-442. PubMed ID: 33583616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The combination of digital surface scanners and cone beam computed tomography technology for guided implant surgery using 3Shape implant studio software: a case history report. Lanis A; Álvarez Del Canto O Int J Prosthodont; 2015; 28(2):169-78. PubMed ID: 25822304 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides. Farley NE; Kennedy K; McGlumphy EA; Clelland NL Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(2):563-72. PubMed ID: 23527361 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of operator experience on the accuracy of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical templates: an in vitro study. Cushen SE; Turkyilmaz I J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Apr; 109(4):248-54. PubMed ID: 23566606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A clinically relevant accuracy study of computer-planned implant placement in the edentulous maxilla using mucosa-supported surgical templates. Verhamme LM; Meijer GJ; Boumans T; de Haan AF; Bergé SJ; Maal TJ Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2015 Apr; 17(2):343-52. PubMed ID: 23879524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]