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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30661881)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Accuracy of different impression techniques for multiunit implant restoration: A qualitative in vitro study.
    Ismail IA; Alhajj MN
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Dec; 124(6):729.e1-729.e5. PubMed ID: 32709404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ; Hertrampf K
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparative Study of Dimensional Accuracy in Three Dental Implant Impression Techniques: Open Tray, Closed Tray with Impression Coping, and Snap Cap.
    Izadi A; Heidari B; Roshanaei G; Allahbakhshi H; Fotovat F
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 Aug; 19(8):974-981. PubMed ID: 30150500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of the accuracy of Biomet 3i Encode Robocast Technology and conventional implant impression techniques.
    Howell KJ; McGlumphy EA; Drago C; Knapik G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(1):228-40. PubMed ID: 23377070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The influence of impression coping splinting on the accuracy of the open-tray technique.
    Kavadia V; Kourtis S; Zoidis P; Sarafianou A
    Gen Dent; 2019; 67(3):e5-e9. PubMed ID: 31199752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Accuracy of a proposed implant impression technique using abutments and metal framework.
    Lee HJ; Lim YJ; Kim CW; Choi JH; Kim MJ
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2010 Mar; 2(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 21165184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effect of dental implant angulation on the dimensional accuracy of master casts.
    Barjini N; Sayahpour S; Jafari M
    Dent Med Probl; 2021; 58(4):473-482. PubMed ID: 34994115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Effect of modified tray design on accuracy of different impression techniques for parallel and divergent implants.
    Dang L; Woliansky M; Palamara J; Abduo J
    J Oral Sci; 2020 Sep; 62(4):439-443. PubMed ID: 32908080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Digital evaluation of the dimensional accuracy of four different implant impression techniques.
    Ozcelik TB; Ozcan I; Ozan O
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2018 Oct; 21(10):1247-1253. PubMed ID: 30297554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials.
    De La Cruz JE; Funkenbusch PD; Ercoli C; Moss ME; Graser GN; Tallents RH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 12426505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Benic GI; Hogsett VL; White GS; Lal K; Gallucci GO
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Jun; 23(6):676-681. PubMed ID: 21631595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Accuracy of Different Implant Impression Techniques: Evaluation of New Tray Design Concept.
    Liu DY; Cader FN; Abduo J; Palamara J
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e682-e687. PubMed ID: 29286181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effect of Implant Angulation and Depth on the Accuracy of Casts Using the Open Tray Splinted Impression Technique.
    Taduri T; Mathur S; Upadhyay S; Patel K; Shah M
    J Oral Implantol; 2021 Dec; 47(6):447-454. PubMed ID: 33270885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions-An In Vitro Study.
    Ribeiro P; Herrero-Climent M; Díaz-Castro C; Ríos-Santos JV; Padrós R; Mur JG; Falcão C
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2018 Jul; 15(8):. PubMed ID: 30060540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study.
    Pujari M; Garg P; Prithviraj DR
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Displacement of implant components from impressions to definitive casts.
    Kim S; Nicholls JI; Han CH; Lee KW
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(5):747-55. PubMed ID: 17066636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.