366 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34799084)
1. 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]
2. [Accuracy of three intraoral scans for primary impressions of edentulous jaws].
Cao Y; Chen JK; Deng KH; Wang Y; Sun YC; Zhao YJ
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2020 Feb; 52(1):129-137. PubMed ID: 32071476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of Different Intraoral Scanners on the Accuracy of Bite Registration in Edentulous Maxillary and Mandibular Arches.
Rutkūnas V; Jegelevičius D; Gedrimienė A; Auškalnis L; Eyüboğlu TF; Özcan M; Husain NA; Akulauskas M; Pletkus J
J Dent; 2024 Jul; 146():105050. PubMed ID: 38735468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: A single-blinded in vitro study.
Michelinakis G; Apostolakis D; Tsagarakis A; Kourakis G; Pavlakis E
J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Nov; 124(5):581-588. PubMed ID: 31870614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of complete-arch implant scanning with 5 different intraoral scanners in terms of trueness and operator experience.
Revell G; Simon B; Mennito A; Evans ZP; Renne W; Ludlow M; Vág J
J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Oct; 128(4):632-638. PubMed ID: 33832761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Exploring the impact of the extent of the partially edentulous area on the accuracy of two intraoral scanners.
Alfaraj A; Khanlar LN; Lin WS; Zandinejad A
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jan; 131(1):163.e1-163.e8. PubMed ID: 37891042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Influence of scan technology on the accuracy and speed of intraoral scanning systems for the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study.
Osman RB; Alharbi NM
J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(9):821-828. PubMed ID: 36571837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Trueness and precision of complete arch dentate digital models produced by intraoral and desktop scanners: An ex-vivo study.
Vag J; Stevens CD; Badahman MH; Ludlow M; Sharp M; Brenes C; Mennito A; Renne W
J Dent; 2023 Dec; 139():104764. PubMed ID: 37898433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of the superimposition reference area on intraoral scanning accuracy in a partially dentate maxilla.
Negm EE; Patel M; Ryan P
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; 132(1):189.e1-189.e11. PubMed ID: 38556406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Accuracy of conventional impressions and digital scans for implant-supported fixed prostheses in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism: An in vitro study.
El Osta N; Drancourt N; Auduc C; Veyrune JL; Nicolas E
J Dent; 2024 Apr; 143():104892. PubMed ID: 38367825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of splinting scan bodies on the trueness of complete arch digital implant scans with 5 different intraoral scanners.
Azevedo L; Marques T; Karasan D; Fehmer V; Sailer I; Correia A; Gómez-Polo M
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; 132(1):204-210. PubMed ID: 37537105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark.
Kim JE; Amelya A; Shin Y; Shim JS
J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jun; 117(6):755-761. PubMed ID: 27863856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Understanding the effect of scan spans on the accuracy of intraoral and desktop scanners.
Chen Y; Zhai Z; Watanabe S; Nakano T; Ishigaki S
J Dent; 2022 Sep; 124():104220. PubMed ID: 35817227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy analysis of complete-arch digital scans in edentulous arches when using an auxiliary geometric device.
Iturrate M; Eguiraun H; Etxaniz O; Solaberrieta E
J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Mar; 121(3):447-454. PubMed ID: 30554826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of different span lengths with different total occlusal convergences on the accuracy of intraoral scanners.
Yehia A; Abo El Fadl A; El Sergany O; Ebeid K
J Prosthodont; 2024 Mar; 33(3):252-258. PubMed ID: 36988154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of digital complete-arch, multi-implant scans made in the edentulous jaw with gingival movement simulation: An in vitro study.
Knechtle N; Wiedemeier D; Mehl A; Ender A
J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):468-478. PubMed ID: 33612335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Scan accuracy and time efficiency of different implant-supported fixed partial denture situations depending on the intraoral scanner and scanned area: An in vitro study.
Donmez MB; Mathey A; Gäumann F; Mathey A; Yilmaz B; Abou-Ayash S
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jun; 131(6):1198-1207. PubMed ID: 36868987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of different intraoral scanners and scanbody splinting on accuracy of scanning implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis.
Ashraf Y; Abo El Fadl A; Hamdy A; Ebeid K
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2023 Dec; 35(8):1257-1263. PubMed ID: 37310208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Influence of ambient light conditions on the accuracy and scanning time of seven intraoral scanners in complete-arch implant scans.
Ochoa-López G; Cascos R; Antonaya-Martín JL; Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M
J Dent; 2022 Jun; 121():104138. PubMed ID: 35461973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
