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.
863 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29550378)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Valente F; Schiroli G; Sbrenna A Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(2):234-42. PubMed ID: 19492638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone beam CT-derived template-based implant placement. Behneke A; Burwinkel M; Behneke N Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Apr; 23(4):416-23. PubMed ID: 22092586 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Clinical accuracy of flapless computer-guided surgery for implant placement in edentulous arches. Vieira DM; Sotto-Maior BS; Barros CA; Reis ES; Francischone CE Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(5):1347-51. PubMed ID: 24066327 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Computer-guided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Pozzi A; Tallarico M; Marchetti M; Scarfò B; Esposito M Eur J Oral Implantol; 2014; 7(3):229-42. PubMed ID: 25237668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. In-office fabrication of dental implant surgical guides using desktop stereolithographic printing and implant treatment planning software: A clinical report. Whitley D; Eidson RS; Rudek I; Bencharit S J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):256-263. PubMed ID: 28222882 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery by a CAD/CAM and laser scanning technique. Zhao XZ; Xu WH; Tang ZH; Wu MJ; Zhu J; Chen S Chin J Dent Res; 2014; 17(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 25028687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An Accuracy Study of Computer-Planned Implant Placement in the Augmented Maxilla Using Mucosa-Supported Surgical Templates. Verhamme LM; Meijer GJ; Bergé SJ; Soehardi RA; Xi T; de Haan AF; Schutyser F; Maal TJ Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2015 Dec; 17(6):1154-63. PubMed ID: 25181255 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study. Derksen W; Wismeijer D; Flügge T; Hassan B; Tahmaseb A Clin Oral Implants Res; 2019 Oct; 30(10):1005-1015. PubMed ID: 31330566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Accuracy assessment of cone beam computed tomography-derived laboratory-based surgical templates on partially edentulous patients. Behneke A; Burwinkel M; Knierim K; Behneke N Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Feb; 23(2):137-143. PubMed ID: 21443593 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]