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.
305 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29971107)
21. Accuracy of digital and conventional dental implant impressions for fixed partial dentures: A comparative clinical study. Gedrimiene A; Adaskevicius R; Rutkunas V J Adv Prosthodont; 2019 Oct; 11(5):271-279. PubMed ID: 31754417 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The Accuracy of Open-Tray vs. Snap on Impression Techniques in A 6-Implant Model: An In Vitro 3D Study. Arieli A; Adawi M; Masri M; Weinberg E; Beitlitum I; Pilo R; Levartovsky S Materials (Basel); 2022 Mar; 15(6):. PubMed ID: 35329555 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Cast accuracy obtained from different impression techniques at different implant angulations (in vitro study). Elshenawy EA; Alam-Eldein AM; Abd Elfatah FA Int J Implant Dent; 2018 Mar; 4(1):9. PubMed ID: 29556841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The effect of impression technique and implant angulation on the impression accuracy of external- and internal-connection implants. Mpikos P; Kafantaris N; Tortopidis D; Galanis C; Kaisarlis G; Koidis P Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(6):1422-8. PubMed ID: 23189292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure. Menini M; Setti P; Pera F; Pera P; Pesce P Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Apr; 22(3):1253-1262. PubMed ID: 28965251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparative evaluation of the effect of impression materials and trays on the accuracy of angulated implants impressions. Siadat H; Saeidi Z; Alikhasi M; Zeighami S J Clin Exp Dent; 2018 Nov; 10(11):e1096-e1102. PubMed ID: 30607227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of implant angulation and impression technique on impressions of NobelActive implants. Alexander Hazboun GB; Masri R; Romberg E; Kempler J; Driscoll CF J Prosthet Dent; 2015 May; 113(5):425-31. PubMed ID: 25749089 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of Different Impression Techniques When Using the All-on-Four Implant Treatment Protocol. Siadat H; Alikhasi M; Beyabanaki E; Rahimian S Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(3):265-70. PubMed ID: 27148987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques in bilateral distal extension cases: a randomized clinical trial. Elashry WY; Elsheikh MM; Elsheikh AM BMC Oral Health; 2024 Jul; 24(1):764. PubMed ID: 38970004 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions: Effects of Different Scanners and Implant Level. Chew AA; Esguerra RJ; Teoh KH; Wong KM; Ng SD; Tan KB Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2017; 32(1):70-80. PubMed ID: 27706264 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations. Bi C; Wang X; Tian F; Qu Z; Zhao J J Adv Prosthodont; 2022 Aug; 14(4):236-249. PubMed ID: 36105881 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Influence of scan body design and digital implant analogs on implant replica position in additively manufactured casts. Revilla-León M; Fogarty R; Barrington JJ; Zandinejad A; Özcan M J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Aug; 124(2):202-210. PubMed ID: 31787272 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of accuracy of various impression techniques and impression materials in recording multiple implants placed unilaterally in a partially edentulous mandible- An Parameshwari G; Chittaranjan B; Sudhir N; Anulekha-Avinash CK; Taruna M; Ramureddy M J Clin Exp Dent; 2018 Apr; 10(4):e388-e395. PubMed ID: 29750102 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. Implant impression accuracy of parallel and non-parallel implants: a comparative in-vitro analysis of open and closed tray techniques. Osman MS; Ziada HM; Abubakr NH; Suliman AM Int J Implant Dent; 2019 Feb; 5(1):4. PubMed ID: 30778790 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of 3D accuracy of three different digital intraoral scanners in full-arch implant impressions. Akkal O; Korkmaz IH; Bayindir F J Adv Prosthodont; 2023 Aug; 15(4):179-188. PubMed ID: 37662853 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A comparative clinical study on the transfer accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions using a new reference key-based method. Schmidt A; Rein PE; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MA Clin Oral Implants Res; 2021 Apr; 32(4):460-469. PubMed ID: 33469983 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Evaluating the Effect of Different Impression Techniques and Splinting Methods on the Dimensional Accuracy of Multiple Implant Impressions: An in vitro Study. Saini HS; Jain S; Kumar S; Aggarwal R; Choudhary S; Reddy NK J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 Aug; 19(8):1005-1012. PubMed ID: 30150505 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and related variables: A systematic review. Zhang YJ; Shi JY; Qian SJ; Qiao SC; Lai HC Int J Oral Implantol (Berl); 2021 May; 14(2):157-179. PubMed ID: 34006079 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]