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 *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30598665)

  • 61. Trueness and precision of combined healing abutment-scan body system depending on the scan pattern and implant location: An in-vitro study.
    Donmez MB; Çakmak G; Atalay S; Yilmaz H; Yilmaz B
    J Dent; 2022 Sep; 124():104169. PubMed ID: 35661761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Influence of rescanning mesh holes and stitching procedures on the complete-arch scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner: An in vitro study.
    Gómez-Polo M; Piedra-Cascón W; Methani MM; Quesada-Olmo N; Farjas-Abadia M; Revilla-León M
    J Dent; 2021 Jul; 110():103690. PubMed ID: 33991598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Congruence between Meshes and Library Files of Implant Scanbodies: An In Vitro Study Comparing Five Intraoral Scanners.
    Mangano F; Lerner H; Margiani B; Solop I; Latuta N; Admakin O
    J Clin Med; 2020 Jul; 9(7):. PubMed ID: 32660070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Accuracy of 14 intraoral scanners for the All-on-4 treatment concept: a comparative
    Kaya G; Bilmenoglu C
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2022 Dec; 14(6):388-398. PubMed ID: 36685788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. [Effect of digital intraoral full-arch scan strategies on scan time and accuracy on conditions of intraoral head-simulator].
    Wu MT; Tang SX; Peng LY; Chen DP; Su YC; Wang X
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Nov; 56(11):1092-1097. PubMed ID: 34763404
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Investigation of the Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners in Mandibular Full-Arch Digital Implant Impression: A Comparative In Vitro Study.
    Di Fiore A; Graiff L; Savio G; Granata S; Basilicata M; Bollero P; Meneghello R
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Apr; 19(8):. PubMed ID: 35457583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons.
    Renne W; Ludlow M; Fryml J; Schurch Z; Mennito A; Kessler R; Lauer A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 28024822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Update on the Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions in 2023: A Coordinate-Based Analysis.
    Schmidt A; Berschin C; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MA
    Int J Prosthodont; 2024 Mar; 0(0):1-19. PubMed ID: 38536148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Does ambient light affect the accuracy and scanning time of intraoral scans?
    Wesemann C; Kienbaum H; Thun M; Spies BC; Beuer F; Bumann A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Jun; 125(6):924-931. PubMed ID: 32487348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner.
    Müller P; Ender A; Joda T; Katsoulis J
    Quintessence Int; 2016 Apr; 47(4):343-9. PubMed ID: 26824085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Effect of posterior span length on the trueness and precision of 3 intraoral digital scanners: A comparative 3-dimensional
    Fattouh M; Kenawi LMM; Fattouh H
    Imaging Sci Dent; 2021 Dec; 51(4):399-406. PubMed ID: 34988000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.
    Flügge TV; Schlager S; Nelson K; Nahles S; Metzger MC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Sep; 144(3):471-8. PubMed ID: 23992820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner.
    Revilla-León M; Subramanian SG; Özcan M; Krishnamurthy VR
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Feb; 29(2):107-113. PubMed ID: 31860144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Influence of the ambient color lighting on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using two intraoral scanners.
    Ochoa-López G; Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38653690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Comparison of the accuracy of direct and indirect three-dimensional digitizing processes for CAD/CAM systems - An in vitro study.
    Vecsei B; Joós-Kovács G; Borbély J; Hermann P
    J Prosthodont Res; 2017 Apr; 61(2):177-184. PubMed ID: 27461088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. In Vitro Comparison of the Accuracy of Conventional Impression and Four Intraoral Scanners in Four Different Implant Impression Scenarios.
    Alpkılıç DŞ; Değer Sİ
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 35235619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions.
    Albayrak B; Sukotjo C; Wee AG; Korkmaz İH; Bayındır F
    J Prosthodont; 2021 Feb; 30(2):163-170. PubMed ID: 32935894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Effect of relative humidity on the accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of dentate complete arch intraoral digital scans.
    Agustín-Panadero R; Estada MIC; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J; Zubizarreta-Macho Á; Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 May; ():. PubMed ID: 37210222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Accuracy of photogrammetry, intraoral scanning, and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an in vitro comparative study.
    Ma B; Yue X; Sun Y; Peng L; Geng W
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Dec; 21(1):636. PubMed ID: 34893053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Accuracy of Digital Impressions Obtained Using Six Intraoral Scanners in Partially Edentulous Dentitions and the Effect of Scanning Sequence.
    Diker B; Tak Ö
    Int J Prosthodont; 2021; 34(1):101-108. PubMed ID: 33570525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.