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 *

458 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29559220)

  • 21. Parameters of passive fit using a new technique to mill implant-supported superstructures: an in vitro study of a novel three-dimensional force measurement-misfit method.
    Tahmaseb A; van de Weijden JJ; Mercelis P; De Clerck R; Wismeijer D
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(2):247-57. PubMed ID: 20369082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of accuracy of multiple dental implant impressions using various splinting materials.
    Hariharan R; Shankar C; Rajan M; Baig MR; Azhagarasan NS
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(1):38-44. PubMed ID: 20209185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of the accuracy between conventional and various digital implant impressions for an implant-supported mandibular complete arch-fixed prosthesis: An in vitro study.
    Kosago P; Ungurawasaporn C; Kukiattrakoon B
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Aug; 32(7):616-624. PubMed ID: 36083233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study.
    Hamilton A; Negreiros WM; Jain S; Finkelman M; Gallucci GO
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 Jun; 35(6):641-651. PubMed ID: 38567801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Digital assessment of the accuracy of implant impression techniques in free end saddle partially edentulous patients. A controlled clinical trial.
    Dohiem MM; Abdelaziz MS; Abdalla MF; Fawzy AM
    BMC Oral Health; 2022 Nov; 22(1):486. PubMed ID: 36371189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Accuracy of impression and pouring techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis.
    Del'Acqua MA; Arioli-Filho JN; Compagnoni MA; Mollo Fde A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(2):226-36. PubMed ID: 18548918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Precision of fit between implant impression coping and implant replica pairs for three implant systems.
    Nicoll RJ; Sun A; Haney S; Turkyilmaz I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Jan; 109(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 23328195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of the accuracy of three techniques used for multiple implant abutment impressions.
    Vigolo P; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Feb; 89(2):186-92. PubMed ID: 12616240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Application of a 3-dimensional measurement system to complete denture impressions.
    Rignon-Bret C; Dupuis R; Gaudy JF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jun; 87(6):603-12. PubMed ID: 12131881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Accuracy, scanning time, and patient satisfaction of stereophotogrammetry systems for acquiring 3D dental implant positions: A systematic review.
    Gómez-Polo M; Barmak AB; Ortega R; Rutkunas V; Kois JC; Revilla-León M
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(S2):208-224. PubMed ID: 37591510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Effect of auxiliary geometric devices on the accuracy of intraoral scans in full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations: An in vitro study.
    Canullo L; Pesce P; Caponio VCA; Iacono R; Luciani FS; Raffone C; Menini M
    J Dent; 2024 Jun; 145():104979. PubMed ID: 38556193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A clinical protocol for intraoral digital impression of screw-retained CAD/CAM framework on multiple implants based on wavefront sampling technology.
    Moreno A; Giménez B; Özcan M; Pradíes G
    Implant Dent; 2013 Aug; 22(4):320-5. PubMed ID: 23817542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. On titanium frameworks and alternative impression techniques in implant dentistry.
    Ortorp A
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 2005; (169):3-88. PubMed ID: 15709359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of the accuracy of plastic and metal stock trays for implant impressions.
    Del'acqua MA; de Avila ÉD; Amaral ÂL; Pinelli LA; de Assis Mollo F
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):544-50. PubMed ID: 22616047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Novel complete-arch pillar system (CAPS) to register implant position and maxillomandibular relationship in one single visit.
    Nuytens P; Grande F; D'haese R; Salameh Z; Lepidi L
    J Dent; 2024 Apr; 143():104885. PubMed ID: 38346663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Accuracy of two impression techniques with angulated implants.
    Conrad HJ; Pesun IJ; DeLong R; Hodges JS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jun; 97(6):349-56. PubMed ID: 17618917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Accuracy of 2 direct digital scanning techniques-intraoral scanning and stereophotogrammetry-for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: A prospective study.
    Yan Y; Lin X; Yue X; Geng W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Oct; 130(4):564-572. PubMed ID: 35667889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Precision of CNC-milled titanium frameworks for implant treatment in the edentulous jaw.
    Jemt T; Bäck T; Petersson A
    Int J Prosthodont; 1999; 12(3):209-15. PubMed ID: 10635187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Influence of the Number of Scan Bodies on Full-Arch Implant Scanning: A Comparison of 2 vs 4 Implants.
    Abdelrehim A; Salleh NM; Sofian H; Sulaiman E
    J Oral Implantol; 2024 Apr; 50(2):104-110. PubMed ID: 38353347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Accuracy of impression scan bodies for complete arch fixed implant-supported restorations.
    Jeong M; Ishikawa-Nagai S; Lee JD; Lee SJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Dec; ():. PubMed ID: 38092618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.