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 *

575 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29576569)

  • 21. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review of Influencing Factors.
    Abduo J; Elseyoufi M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2018 Aug; 26(3):101-121. PubMed ID: 29989757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Continuous Scan Strategy (CSS): A Novel Technique to Improve the Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions.
    Imburgia M; Kois J; Marino E; Lerner H; Mangano FG
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2020 Aug; 28(3):128-141. PubMed ID: 32750237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro.
    Schaefer O; Decker M; Wittstock F; Kuepper H; Guentsch A
    J Dent; 2014 Jun; 42(6):677-83. PubMed ID: 24508541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A fully digital approach to replicate functional and aesthetic parameters in implant-supported full-arch rehabilitation.
    Monaco C; Ragazzini N; Scheda L; Evangelisti E
    J Prosthodont Res; 2018 Jul; 62(3):383-385. PubMed ID: 29191608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Intraoral scanners in implant prosthodontics. A narrative review.
    Rutkūnas V; Auškalnis L; Pletkus J
    J Dent; 2024 Sep; 148():105152. PubMed ID: 38909643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients.
    Boeddinghaus M; Breloer ES; Rehmann P; Wöstmann B
    Clin Oral Investig; 2015 Nov; 19(8):2027-34. PubMed ID: 25693497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Utilization of digital technologies for fabrication of definitive implant-supported restorations.
    Ramsey CD; Ritter RG
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2012 Oct; 24(5):299-308. PubMed ID: 23025311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations.
    Galhano GÁ; Pellizzer EP; Mazaro JV
    J Craniofac Surg; 2012 Nov; 23(6):e575-9. PubMed ID: 23172483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Accuracy of Digital Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.
    Giachetti L; Sarti C; Cinelli F; Russo DS
    Int J Prosthodont; 2020; 33(2):192-201. PubMed ID: 32069344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions.
    Anadioti E; Aquilino SA; Gratton DG; Holloway JA; Denry I; Thomas GW; Qian F
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Dec; 23(8):610-7. PubMed ID: 24995593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effect of conventional, half-digital, and full-digital fabrication techniques on the retention and apical gap of post and core restorations.
    Hendi AR; Moharrami M; Siadat H; Hajmiragha H; Alikhasi M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Feb; 121(2):364.e1-364.e6. PubMed ID: 30598306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses.
    Shimizu S; Shinya A; Kuroda S; Gomi H
    Dent Mater J; 2017 Jul; 36(4):402-407. PubMed ID: 28302948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material.
    Sakornwimon N; Leevailoj C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):386-391. PubMed ID: 28222872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark.
    Kim JE; Amelya A; Shin Y; Shim JS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jun; 117(6):755-761. PubMed ID: 27863856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions for Whole Upper Jaws, Including Full Dentitions and Palatal Soft Tissues.
    Gan N; Xiong Y; Jiao T
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0158800. PubMed ID: 27383409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparative assessment of complete-coverage, fixed tooth-supported prostheses fabricated from digital scans or conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Bandiaky ON; Le Bars P; Gaudin A; Hardouin JB; Cheraud-Carpentier M; Mbodj EB; Soueidan A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Jan; 127(1):71-79. PubMed ID: 33143901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effect of digital impressions and production protocols on the adaptation of zirconia copings.
    Kocaağaoğlu H; Kılınç HI; Albayrak H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jan; 117(1):102-108. PubMed ID: 27622786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Computer-aided analysis of digital dental impressions obtained from intraoral and extraoral scanners.
    Bohner LOL; De Luca Canto G; Marció BS; Laganá DC; Sesma N; Tortamano Neto P
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Nov; 118(5):617-623. PubMed ID: 28385434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Accuracy and efficiency of full-arch digitalization and 3D printing: A comparison between desktop model scanners, an intraoral scanner, a CBCT model scan, and stereolithographic 3D printing.
    Wesemann C; Muallah J; Mah J; Bumann A
    Quintessence Int; 2017; 48(1):41-50. PubMed ID: 27834416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Fabrication systems for restorations and fixed dental prostheses made of titanium and titanium alloys.
    Takeuchi Y; Tanaka M; Tanaka J; Kamimoto A; Furuchi M; Imai H
    J Prosthodont Res; 2020 Jan; 64(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 31711856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 29.