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 *

425 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31079882)

  • 1. Accuracy of complete-arch implant impression made with occlusal registration material.
    Papazoglou E; Wee AG; Carr AB; Urban I; Margaritis V
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):143-148. PubMed ID: 31079882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Three Different Impression Materials Using Three Different Techniques for Implant Impressions: An
    Khan SA; Singh S; Neyaz N; Jaiswal MM; Tanwar AS; Singh A
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Feb; 22(2):172-178. PubMed ID: 34257178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of accuracy of complete-arch multiple-unit abutment-level dental implant impressions using different impression and splinting materials.
    Buzayan M; Baig MR; Yunus N
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(6):1512-20. PubMed ID: 24278919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations.
    Al-Abdullah K; Zandparsa R; Finkelman M; Hirayama H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Aug; 110(2):90-100. PubMed ID: 23929370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of accuracy of hexed and nonhexed pickup impression copings in a multiple variable impression setup for recording multiple straight and angulated implant positions: An
    Kaur T; Singla S; Kumar L
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2023; 23(1):21-29. PubMed ID: 36588371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative evaluation of the effects of implant position, impression material, and tray type on implant impression accuracy.
    Gökçen-Rohlig B; Ongül D; Sancakli E; Sermet B
    Implant Dent; 2014 Jun; 23(3):283-8. PubMed ID: 24844388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of a new elastomeric impression material for complete-arch dental implant impressions.
    Baig MR; Buzayan MM; Yunus N
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2018 May; 9(2):e12320. PubMed ID: 29349910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of accuracy of multiple dental implant impressions using various splinting materials.
    Hariharan R; Shankar C; Rajan M; Baig MR; Azhagarasan NS
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(1):38-44. PubMed ID: 20209185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A clinical pilot study of the dimensional accuracy of double-arch and complete-arch impressions.
    Cox JR; Brandt RL; Hughes HJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 May; 87(5):510-5. PubMed ID: 12070514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of the accuracy of plastic and metal stock trays for implant impressions.
    Del'acqua MA; de Avila ÉD; Amaral ÂL; Pinelli LA; de Assis Mollo F
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):544-50. PubMed ID: 22616047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Conventional open-tray impression versus intraoral digital scan for implant-level complete-arch impression.
    Kim KR; Seo KY; Kim S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Dec; 122(6):543-549. PubMed ID: 30955939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Nov; 92(5):470-6. PubMed ID: 15523336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of splinted and nonsplinted impression techniques on the accuracy of fit of fixed implant prostheses in edentulous patients: a comparative study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Lal K; White GS; Weber HP; Gallucci GO
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(6):1267-72. PubMed ID: 22167432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.