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 *

257 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31074138)

  • 1. Effect of scan substrates on accuracy of 7 intraoral digital impression systems using human maxilla model.
    Bocklet C; Renne W; Mennito A; Bacro T; Latham J; Evans Z; Ludlow M; Kelly A; Nash J
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2019 May; 22 Suppl 1():168-174. PubMed ID: 31074138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the trueness and precision of complete arch digital impressions on a human maxilla using seven different intraoral digital impression systems and a laboratory scanner.
    Mennito AS; Evans ZP; Nash J; Bocklet C; Lauer Kelly A; Bacro T; Cayouette M; Ludlow M; Renne WG
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2019 Jul; 31(4):369-377. PubMed ID: 31058428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Comparing the trueness of seven intraoral scanners and a physical impression on dentate human maxilla by a novel method.
    Nagy Z; Simon B; Mennito A; Evans Z; Renne W; Vág J
    BMC Oral Health; 2020 Apr; 20(1):97. PubMed ID: 32264943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of software updates on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanners.
    Vág J; Renne W; Revell G; Ludlow M; Mennito A; Teich ST; Gutmacher Z
    Quintessence Int; 2021 Jun; 52(7):636-644. PubMed ID: 33749223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Influence of different material substrates on the accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: A single-blinded in vitro study.
    Michelinakis G; Apostolakis D; Tsagarakis A; Lampropoulos P
    Int J Prosthodont; 2022; 35(1):82–93. PubMed ID: 33751003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact of different scanning strategies on the accuracy of two current intraoral scanning systems in complete-arch impressions: an in vitro study.
    Passos L; Meiga S; Brigagão V; Street A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(4):307-319. PubMed ID: 31840139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Scan time and accuracy of full-arch scans with intraoral scanners: a comparative study on conditions of the intraoral head-simulator and the hand-held model].
    Wu MT; Tang SX; Peng LY; Han YT; Su YC; Wang X
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Jun; 56(6):570-575. PubMed ID: 34098673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro.
    Ender A; Zimmermann M; Mehl A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 30848250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of the accuracy of multiple digital impression systems on a fully edentulous maxilla.
    Gutmacher Z; Kelly A; Renne W; Hoover M; Mennito A; Teich S; Cayouette M; Ludlow M
    Quintessence Int; 2021 May; 52(6):488-495. PubMed ID: 33880909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect different substrates have on the trueness and precision of eight different intraoral scanners.
    Dutton E; Ludlow M; Mennito A; Kelly A; Evans Z; Culp A; Kessler R; Renne W
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2020 Mar; 32(2):204-218. PubMed ID: 31568660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy of full-arch digital impressions: an in vitro and in vivo comparison.
    Keul C; Güth JF
    Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Feb; 24(2):735-745. PubMed ID: 31134345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients.
    Kuhr F; Schmidt A; Rehmann P; Wöstmann B
    J Dent; 2016 Dec; 55():68-74. PubMed ID: 27717754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance.
    Atieh MA; Ritter AV; Ko CC; Duqum I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):400-405. PubMed ID: 28222869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [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]  

  • 18. Effect of scan pattern on complete-arch scans with 4 digital scanners.
    Latham J; Ludlow M; Mennito A; Kelly A; Evans Z; Renne W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):85-95. PubMed ID: 30982616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2011; 14(1):11-21. PubMed ID: 21657122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    Quintessence Int; 2015 Jan; 46(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 25019118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.