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 *

210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34776266)

  • 21. Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.
    Meneghetti PC; Li J; Borella PS; Mendonça G; Burnett LH
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(12):e0295790. PubMed ID: 38113200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Effect of intraoral scanner and fixed partial denture situation on the scan accuracy of multiple implants: An in vitro study.
    Donmez MB; Mathey A; Gäumann F; Mathey A; Yilmaz B; Abou-Ayash S
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2023 Jun; 25(3):502-510. PubMed ID: 36762495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Accuracy of photogrammetry, intraoral scanning, and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an in vitro comparative study.
    Ma B; Yue X; Sun Y; Peng L; Geng W
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Dec; 21(1):636. PubMed ID: 34893053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study.
    Papaspyridakos P; Benic GI; Hogsett VL; White GS; Lal K; Gallucci GO
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Jun; 23(6):676-681. PubMed ID: 21631595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effect of a Novel 'Scan Body' on the In Vitro Scanning Accuracy of Full-Arch Implant Impressions.
    Zhang T; Yang B; Ge R; Zhang C; Zhang H; Wang Y
    Int Dent J; 2024 Aug; 74(4):847-854. PubMed ID: 38368235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Accuracy of multi-implant impressions using 3D-printing custom trays and splinting versus conventional techniques for complete arches.
    Liu Y; Di P; Zhao Y; Hao Q; Tian J; Cui H
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(4):1007–1014. PubMed ID: 31107937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A novel post-processing strategy to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning for implants: an in vitro study.
    Pan Y; Dai X; Wan F; Song C; Tsoi JK; Pow EH
    J Dent; 2023 Dec; 139():104761. PubMed ID: 37879557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Impact of intraoral scanner, scanning strategy, and scanned arch on the scan accuracy of edentulous arches: An in vitro study.
    Jamjoom FZ; Aldghim A; Aldibasi O; Yilmaz B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jun; 131(6):1218-1225. PubMed ID: 36841708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Accuracy of three digital scanning methods for complete-arch tooth preparation: An in vitro comparison.
    Gao H; Liu X; Liu M; Yang X; Tan J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1001-1008. PubMed ID: 33736864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparing the accuracy of full-arch implant impressions using the conventional technique and digital scans with and without prefabricated landmarks in the mandible: An in vitro study.
    Ke Y; Zhang Y; Wang Y; Chen H; Sun Y
    J Dent; 2023 Aug; 135():104561. PubMed ID: 37236297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Trueness of a device for intraoral scanning to capture the angle and distance between implants in edentulous mandibular arches.
    Carneiro Pereira AL; Carvalho Porto de Freitas RF; de Fátima Trindade Pinto Campos M; Soares Paiva Tôrres AC; Bezerra de Medeiros AK; da Fonte Porto Carreiro A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Dec; 128(6):1310-1317. PubMed ID: 33865563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study.
    Hamilton A; Negreiros WM; Jain S; Finkelman M; Gallucci GO
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 Jun; 35(6):641-651. PubMed ID: 38567801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Influence of the surface humidity, implant angulation, and interimplant distance on the accuracy and scanning time of complete-arch implant scans.
    Gómez-Polo M; Ortega R; Sallorenzo A; Agustín-Panadero R; Barmak AB; Kois JC; Revilla-León M
    J Dent; 2022 Dec; 127():104307. PubMed ID: 36162637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Influence of the Number of Scan Bodies on Full-Arch Implant Scanning: A Comparison of 2 vs 4 Implants.
    Abdelrehim A; Salleh NM; Sofian H; Sulaiman E
    J Oral Implantol; 2024 Apr; 50(2):104-110. PubMed ID: 38353347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Accuracy of digital and conventional implant-level impression techniques for maxillary full-arch screw-retained prosthesis: A crossover randomized trial.
    Jasim AG; Abo Elezz MG; Altonbary GY; Elsyad MA
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2024 Aug; 26(4):714-723. PubMed ID: 38727015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. [Accuracy of photogrammetry and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an
    Sun YJ; Ma BW; Yue XX; Lin X; Geng W
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2022 Feb; 57(2):168-172. PubMed ID: 35152653
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.