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 *

231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31672422)

  • 1. Accuracy of virtual interocclusal records for partially edentulous patients.
    Ren S; Morton D; Lin WS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jun; 123(6):860-865. PubMed ID: 31672422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of a chairside intraoral scanner compared with a laboratory scanner for the completely edentulous maxilla: An in vitro 3-dimensional comparative analysis.
    Zarone F; Ruggiero G; Ferrari M; Mangano F; Joda T; Sorrentino R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Dec; 124(6):761.e1-761.e7. PubMed ID: 33289647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy and reproducibility of virtual edentulous casts created by laboratory impression scan protocols.
    Peng L; Chen L; Harris BT; Bhandari B; Morton D; Lin WS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Sep; 120(3):389-395. PubMed ID: 29703675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Digital mounting accuracy of 2 intraoral scanners with a single anterior or bilateral posterior occlusal scan: A three-dimensional analysis.
    Cha C; Pyo SW; Chang JS; Kim S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Oct; 130(4):612.e1-612.e8. PubMed ID: 37633731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Three-dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional impressions of edentulous jaws: A clinical study.
    Lo Russo L; Caradonna G; Troiano G; Salamini A; Guida L; Ciavarella D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Feb; 123(2):264-268. PubMed ID: 31153614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of impression-making methods in edentulous arches: An in vitro study encompassing conventional and digital methods.
    Li J; Moon HS; Kim JH; Yoon HI; Oh KC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):479-486. PubMed ID: 33583617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Three-dimensional analysis of the accuracy of conventional and completely digital interocclusal registration methods.
    Ries JM; Grünler C; Wichmann M; Matta RE
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):994-1000. PubMed ID: 33888327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Influence of intraoral scanning coverage on the accuracy of digital implant impressions - An in vitro study.
    Wang ZY; Gong Y; Liu F; Chen D; Zheng JW; Shen JF
    J Dent; 2024 Apr; 143():104929. PubMed ID: 38458380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Implant Impressions: Effect of Interimplant Distance in an Edentulous Arch.
    Tan MY; Yee SHX; Wong KM; Tan YH; Tan KBC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(2):366–380. PubMed ID: 30521661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of Virtual Static Articulation: A Systematic Review.
    Shadid R; Sadaqah N
    Int J Prosthodont; 2022; 35(5):627–646. PubMed ID: 35349610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners for scanning edentulous and dentate complete-arch mandibular casts: A comparative in vitro study.
    Braian M; Wennerberg A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Aug; 122(2):129-136.e2. PubMed ID: 30885584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy analysis of complete-arch digital scans in edentulous arches when using an auxiliary geometric device.
    Iturrate M; Eguiraun H; Etxaniz O; Solaberrieta E
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Mar; 121(3):447-454. PubMed ID: 30554826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Factors that influence the accuracy of maxillomandibular relationship at maximum intercuspation acquired by using intraoral scanners: A systematic review.
    Revilla-León M; Barmak AB; Tohme H; Yilmaz B; Kois JC; Gómez-Polo M
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104718. PubMed ID: 37775027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques.
    Alsharbaty MHM; Alikhasi M; Zarrati S; Shamshiri AR
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Apr; 28(4):e902-e908. PubMed ID: 29423969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of length and location of edentulous area on the accuracy of prosthetic treatment plan incorporation into cone-beam computed tomography scans.
    Jamjoom FZ; Kim DG; Lee DJ; McGlumphy EA; Yilmaz B
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2018 Jun; 20(3):300-307. PubMed ID: 29399999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of digital and silicone impressions for single-tooth implants and two- and three-unit implants for a free-end edentulous saddle.
    Nagata K; Fuchigami K; Okuhama Y; Wakamori K; Tsuruoka H; Nakashizu T; Hoshi N; Atsumi M; Kimoto K; Kawana H
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Sep; 21(1):464. PubMed ID: 34556111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of 3D Printed and Digital Casts Produced from Intraoral and Extraoral Scanners with Different Scanning Technologies: In Vitro Study.
    Ellakany P; Aly NM; Al-Harbi F
    J Prosthodont; 2022 Jul; 31(6):521-528. PubMed ID: 34661950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of titanium dioxide and composite on the accuracy of an intraoral scanner for bilateral upper posterior edentulous jaw (Kennedy class I) scanning: An in vitro study.
    Vo HM; Huynh NC; Tran TT; Hoang HT; Nguyen AT
    J Dent; 2023 Dec; 139():104747. PubMed ID: 37863172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes.
    Papaspyridakos P; Gallucci GO; Chen CJ; Hanssen S; Naert I; Vandenberghe B
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Apr; 27(4):465-72. PubMed ID: 25682892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.