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 *

217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31754417)

  • 1. Accuracy of digital and conventional dental implant impressions for fixed partial dentures: A comparative clinical study.
    Gedrimiene A; Adaskevicius R; Rutkunas V
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2019 Oct; 11(5):271-279. PubMed ID: 31754417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of the Clinical Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Dental Implant Impressions.
    Rutkunas V; Gedrimiene A; Adaskevicius R; Al-Haj Husain N; Özcan M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2020 Nov; 28(4):173-181. PubMed ID: 32673469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review.
    Michelinakis G; Apostolakis D; Kamposiora P; Papavasiliou G; Özcan M
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Jan; 21(1):37. PubMed ID: 33478459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study.
    Amin S; Weber HP; Finkelman M; El Rafie K; Kudara Y; Papaspyridakos P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2017 Nov; 28(11):1360-1367. PubMed ID: 28039903
    [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. 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]  

  • 9. Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques in bilateral distal extension cases: a randomized clinical trial.
    Elashry WY; Elsheikh MM; Elsheikh AM
    BMC Oral Health; 2024 Jul; 24(1):764. PubMed ID: 38970004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Impression versus Conventional Method: Effect of Implant Angulation and Connection Type.
    Alikhasi M; Siadat H; Nasirpour A; Hasanzade M
    Int J Dent; 2018; 2018():3761750. PubMed ID: 29971107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of digital impressions versus conventional impressions for 2 implants: an in vitro study evaluating the effect of implant angulation.
    Abduo J; Palamara JEA
    Int J Implant Dent; 2021 Jul; 7(1):75. PubMed ID: 34327601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies: An in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation.
    Huang R; Liu Y; Huang B; Zhang C; Chen Z; Li Z
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2020 Jul; 31(7):625-633. PubMed ID: 32181919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital Versus Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Prospective Study on 16 Edentulous Maxillae.
    Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P; Tsigarida A; Romeo D; Chen YW; Natto Z; Ercoli C
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Apr; 29(4):281-286. PubMed ID: 32166793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of conventional and digital workflows for implant-supported screw-retained zirconia FPD bars: Fit and cement gap evaluation using SEM analysis.
    Rutkūnas V; Gedrimiene A; Jacobs R; Malinauskas M
    Int J Oral Implantol (Berl); 2021 May; 14(2):199-210. PubMed ID: 34006081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions: two and three dimensional evaluations.
    Bi C; Wang X; Tian F; Qu Z; Zhao J
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2022 Aug; 14(4):236-249. PubMed ID: 36105881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Clinical and laboratory passive fit assessment of implant-supported zirconia restorations fabricated using conventional and digital workflow.
    Rutkunas V; Larsson C; Vult von Steyern P; Mangano F; Gedrimiene A
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2020 Apr; 22(2):237-245. PubMed ID: 32026603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Impression Techniques for Implant Restorations.
    Moura RV; Kojima AN; Saraceni CHC; Bassolli L; Balducci I; Özcan M; Mesquita AMM
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e530-e535. PubMed ID: 29717518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.