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 *

546 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34006079)

  • 21. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy.
    Marghalani A; Weber HP; Finkelman M; Kudara Y; El Rafie K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Apr; 119(4):574-579. PubMed ID: 28927923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 3D Accuracy of a Conventional Method Versus Three Digital Scanning Strategies for Completely Edentulous Maxillary Implant Impressions.
    Blanco-Plard A; Hernandez A; Pino F; Vargas N; Rivas-Tumanyan S; Elias A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2023 Dec; 38(6):1211-1219. PubMed ID: 38085753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Digital vs Conventional Implant Impressions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Papaspyridakos P; Vazouras K; Chen YW; Kotina E; Natto Z; Kang K; Chochlidakis K
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Oct; 29(8):660-678. PubMed ID: 32613641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Digital Impressions in Implant Dentistry: A Literature Review.
    Marques S; Ribeiro P; Falcão C; Lemos BF; Ríos-Carrasco B; Ríos-Santos JV; Herrero-Climent M
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Jan; 18(3):. PubMed ID: 33498902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effect of additional reference objects on accuracy of five intraoral scanners in partially and completely edentulous jaws: An in vitro study.
    Rutkūnas V; Gedrimienė A; Al-Haj Husain N; Pletkus J; Barauskis D; Jegelevičius D; Özcan M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Jul; 130(1):111-118. PubMed ID: 34799084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients.
    Kuhr F; Schmidt A; Rehmann P; Wöstmann B
    J Dent; 2016 Dec; 55():68-74. PubMed ID: 27717754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy.
    Revilla-León M; Lanis A; Yilmaz B; Kois JC; Gallucci GO
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(S2):150-164. PubMed ID: 37586762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Accuracy of impressions for multiple implants: A comparative study of digital and conventional techniques.
    Lyu M; Di P; Lin Y; Jiang X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1017-1023. PubMed ID: 33640093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners.
    Di Fiore A; Meneghello R; Graiff L; Savio G; Vigolo P; Monaco C; Stellini E
    J Prosthodont Res; 2019 Oct; 63(4):396-403. PubMed ID: 31072730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Accuracy of Complete-Arch Implant Digital Scans: Effect of Scanning Protocol, Number of Implants, and Scan Body Splinting.
    Denneulin T; Rignon-Bret C; Ravalec G; Tapie L; Bouter D; Wulfman C
    Int J Prosthodont; 2023 May; 36(2):219-227. PubMed ID: 36288490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Effect of different impression coping and scan body designs on the accuracy of conventional versus digital implant impressions: An in vitro study.
    Alkindi S; Hamdoon Z; Aziz AM
    J Dent; 2024 Jul; 146():105045. PubMed ID: 38714241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A comparative clinical study on the transfer accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions using a new reference key-based method.
    Schmidt A; Rein PE; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MA
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2021 Apr; 32(4):460-469. PubMed ID: 33469983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations: A systematic review.
    Wulfman C; Naveau A; Rignon-Bret C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Aug; 124(2):161-167. PubMed ID: 31757443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant-supported dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Flügge T; van der Meer WJ; Gonzalez BG; Vach K; Wismeijer D; Wang P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Oct; 29 Suppl 16():374-392. PubMed ID: 30328182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Accuracy of full-arch digital impressions: an in vitro and in vivo comparison.
    Keul C; Güth JF
    Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Feb; 24(2):735-745. PubMed ID: 31134345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Influence of implant position on the accuracy of intraoral scanning in fully edentulous arches: A systematic review.
    Carneiro Pereira AL; Medeiros VR; da Fonte Porto Carreiro A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Dec; 126(6):749-755. PubMed ID: 33268069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Accuracy of computerized and conventional impression-making procedures for multiple straight and tilted dental implants.
    Gintaute A; Papatriantafyllou N; Aljehani M; Att W
    Int J Esthet Dent; 2018; 13(4):550-565. PubMed ID: 30302442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effect of Scan Pattern on the Accuracy of Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impressions with Two Intraoral Scanners.
    Li Z; Huang R; Wu X; Chen Z; Huang B; Chen Z
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(4):731-739. PubMed ID: 35904829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 28.