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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32173362)

  • 1. In vitro precision evaluation of blue light scanning of abutment teeth made with impressions and dental stone casts according to different 3D superimposition methods.
    Jeon JH
    J Prosthodont Res; 2020 Oct; 64(4):368-372. PubMed ID: 32173362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Trueness and precision of scanning abutment impressions and stone models according to dental CAD/CAM evaluation standards.
    Jeon JH; Hwang SS; Kim JH; Kim WC
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2018 Oct; 10(5):335-339. PubMed ID: 30370023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scanned conventional impressions of prepared teeth generated with white- and blue-light scanners.
    Jeon JH; Choi BY; Kim CM; Kim JH; Kim HY; Kim WC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Oct; 114(4):549-53. PubMed ID: 26182854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Interproximal distance analysis of stereolithographic casts made by CAD-CAM technology: An in vitro study.
    Hoffman M; Cho SH; Bansal NK
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Nov; 118(5):624-630. PubMed ID: 28477918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions.
    Carbajal Mejía JB; Wakabayashi K; Nakamura T; Yatani H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):392-399. PubMed ID: 28222873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression.
    Su TS; Sun J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):362-7. PubMed ID: 27061628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of 3-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated on 3D-printed casts.
    Jang Y; Sim JY; Park JK; Kim WC; Kim HY; Kim JH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):135-142. PubMed ID: 31027960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Three-dimensional analysis of marginal and internal fit of copings fabricated with polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and zirconia.
    Bae SY; Park JY; Jeong ID; Kim HY; Kim JH; Kim WC
    J Prosthodont Res; 2017 Apr; 61(2):106-112. PubMed ID: 27484816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of 3D Printed Implant Casts Versus Stone Casts: A Comparative Study in the Anterior Maxilla.
    Banjar A; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Prosthodont; 2021 Dec; 30(9):783-788. PubMed ID: 33474754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions.
    Anadioti E; Aquilino SA; Gratton DG; Holloway JA; Denry I; Thomas GW; Qian F
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Dec; 23(8):610-7. PubMed ID: 24995593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions: evaluation of trueness and precision.
    Jeon JH; Kim HY; Kim JH; Kim WC
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2014 Dec; 6(6):468-73. PubMed ID: 25551007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scans of stone models and impressions using a blue LED scanner.
    Jeon JH; Jung ID; Kim JH; Kim HY; Kim WC
    Dent Mater J; 2015; 34(5):686-91. PubMed ID: 26438993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dimensional accuracy of microcomputed tomography-scanned half-arch impressions.
    Kerr M; Park N; Leeson D; Nikolskiy S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 May; 121(5):797-802. PubMed ID: 30617030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Effect of feldspathic porcelain layering on the marginal fit of zirconia and titanium complete-arch fixed implant-supported frameworks.
    Yilmaz B; Alshahrani FA; Kale E; Johnston WM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jul; 120(1):71-78. PubMed ID: 29426786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Repeatability and reproducibility of individual abutment impression, assessed with a blue light scanner.
    Jeon JH; Kim DY; Lee JJ; Kim JH; Kim WC
    J Adv Prosthodont; 2016 Jun; 8(3):214-8. PubMed ID: 27350856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Best-Fit Algorithm Influences on Virtual Casts' Alignment Discrepancies.
    Revilla-León M; Gohil A; Barmak AB; Zandinejad A; Raigrodski AJ; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Apr; 32(4):331-339. PubMed ID: 35524587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Full-arch implant fixed prostheses: a comparative study on the effect of connection type and impression technique on accuracy of fit.
    Papaspyridakos P; Hirayama H; Chen CJ; Ho CH; Chronopoulos V; Weber HP
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Sep; 27(9):1099-105. PubMed ID: 26374268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.