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 *

303 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32336539)

  • 21. Fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated from conventional and digital impressions assessed with micro-CT.
    Kim JH; Jeong JH; Lee JH; Cho HW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Oct; 116(4):551-557. PubMed ID: 27422237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design.
    Euán R; Figueras-Álvarez O; Cabratosa-Termes J; Oliver-Parra R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):155-62. PubMed ID: 24445027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effect of cement space on the marginal fit of CAD-CAM-fabricated monolithic zirconia crowns.
    Kale E; Seker E; Yilmaz B; Özcelik TB
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Dec; 116(6):890-895. PubMed ID: 27460314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparison of fit accuracy of pressed lithium disilicate inlays fabricated from wax or resin patterns with conventional and CAD-CAM technologies.
    Homsy FR; Özcan M; Khoury M; Majzoub ZAK
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Oct; 120(4):530-536. PubMed ID: 30318049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effect of different fabrication steps on the marginal adaptation of two types of glass-infiltrated ceramic crown copings fabricated by CAD/CAM technology.
    Alghazzawi TF; Liu PR; Essig ME
    J Prosthodont; 2012 Apr; 21(3):167-72. PubMed ID: 22372838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Marginal and internal fit of metal copings fabricated with rapid prototyping and conventional waxing.
    Farjood E; Vojdani M; Torabi K; Khaledi AA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jan; 117(1):164-170. PubMed ID: 27460320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Influence of Intra-Oral Scanner (I.O.S.) on The Marginal Accuracy of CAD/CAM Single Crowns.
    Ferrini F; Sannino G; Chiola C; Capparé P; Gastaldi G; Gherlone EF
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2019 Feb; 16(4):. PubMed ID: 30769768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Internal fit of pressed and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions.
    Anadioti E; Aquilino SA; Gratton DG; Holloway JA; Denry IL; Thomas GW; Qian F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):304-9. PubMed ID: 25488521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Assessment of the internal fit and marginal integrity of interim crowns made by different manufacturing methods.
    Peng CC; Chung KH; Yau HT; Ramos V
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Mar; 123(3):514-522. PubMed ID: 31353116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Marginal and Internal Fit of CAD/CAM Crowns Fabricated Over Reverse Tapered Preparations.
    Carbajal Mejía JB; Yatani H; Wakabayashi K; Nakamura T
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e477-e484. PubMed ID: 29194841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of the Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns made from Conventional, Digital, or Conventional/Digital Techniques.
    Al Hamad KQ; Al Rashdan BA; Al Omari WM; Baba NZ
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e580-e586. PubMed ID: 30091168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effect of different fabrication techniques on the marginal precision of polyetheretherketone single-crown copings.
    Attia MA; Shokry TE
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Nov; 124(5):565.e1-565.e7. PubMed ID: 32636071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Marginal adaptation of CAD-CAM onlays: Influence of preparation design and impression technique.
    Lima FF; Neto CF; Rubo JH; Santos GC; Moraes Coelho Santos MJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Sep; 120(3):396-402. PubMed ID: 29551386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Marginal and internal fit of pressed ceramic crowns made from conventional and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing wax patterns: An in vitro comparison.
    Shamseddine L; Mortada R; Rifai K; Chidiac JJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Aug; 116(2):242-8. PubMed ID: 26948080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Marginal fit of CAD-CAM monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated by using cone beam computed tomography scans.
    Kale E; Cilli M; Özçelik TB; Yilmaz B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 May; 123(5):731-737. PubMed ID: 31653403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions.
    Zarauz C; Valverde A; Martinez-Rus F; Hassan B; Pradies G
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 May; 20(4):799-806. PubMed ID: 26362778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A clinical comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques regarding finish line locations and impression time.
    Koulivand S; Ghodsi S; Siadat H; Alikhasi M
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2020 Mar; 32(2):236-243. PubMed ID: 31565836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Influence of scanner, powder application, and adjustments on CAD-CAM crown misfit.
    Prudente MS; Davi LR; Nabbout KO; Prado CJ; Pereira LM; Zancopé K; Neves FD
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Mar; 119(3):377-383. PubMed ID: 28689912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Comparison of marginal fit between CAD-CAM and hot-press lithium disilicate crowns.
    Dolev E; Bitterman Y; Meirowitz A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Jan; 121(1):124-128. PubMed ID: 29961628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.