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 *

209 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35187813)

  • 1. Comparison of internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns in CAD/CAM and lost-wax techniques in all fabrication stages through replica weighting, triple scanning, and scanning electron microscope.
    Sadr SM; Ahmadi E; Tabatabaei MH; Mohammadi S; Atri F
    Clin Exp Dent Res; 2022 Jun; 8(3):763-770. PubMed ID: 35187813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of the marginal discrepancy of PFM crowns in the CAD/CAM and lost-wax fabrication techniques by triple scanning.
    Ahmadi E; Tabatabaei MH; Sadr SM; Atri F
    Dent Med Probl; 2020; 57(4):417-422. PubMed ID: 33444489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Internal fit of single crowns produced by CAD-CAM and lost-wax metal casting technique assessed by the triple-scan protocol.
    Dahl BE; Rønold HJ; Dahl JE
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Mar; 117(3):400-404. PubMed ID: 27692584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of porcelain firing and cementation on the marginal fit of implant-supported metal-ceramic restorations fabricated by additive or subtractive manufacturing methods.
    Yildirim B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Oct; 124(4):476.e1-476.e6. PubMed ID: 32451142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Comparison of the Marginal Fit of Cobalt-Chromium Metal-Ceramic Crowns Fabricated by CAD/CAM Techniques and Conventional Methods at Three Production Stages.
    Real-Voltas F; Romano-Cardozo E; Figueras-Alvarez O; Brufau-de Barbera M; Cabratosa-Termes J
    Int J Prosthodont; 2017; 30(3):304–305. PubMed ID: 28319213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In vitro evaluation of marginal adaptation in five ceramic restoration fabricating techniques.
    Ural C; Burgaz Y; Saraç D
    Quintessence Int; 2010; 41(7):585-90. PubMed ID: 20614046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Fit of pressed crowns fabricated from two CAD-CAM wax pattern process plans: A comparative in vitro study.
    Shamseddine L; Mortada R; Rifai K; Chidiac JJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul; 118(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 28024815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Influence of manufacturing technique on marginal fit of cobalt chromium restorations: An
    Sarda AS; Bedia SV
    Indian J Dent Res; 2021; 32(4):495-499. PubMed ID: 35645078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of loupes versus microscope-enhanced CAD-CAM crown preparations: A microcomputed tomography analysis of marginal gaps.
    Atlas AM; Janyavula S; Elsabee R; Alper E; Isleem WF; Bergler M; Setzer FC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; 131(4):643-651. PubMed ID: 35643825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Marginal fit of 3-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures: Influence of pattern fabrication method and repeated porcelain firings.
    Giti R; Farrahi P
    PLoS One; 2024; 19(4):e0301799. PubMed ID: 38625846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A comparison of marginal fit between press-fabricated and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns.
    Carlile RS; Owens WH; Greenwood WJ; Guevara PH
    Gen Dent; 2018; 66(1):45-48. PubMed ID: 29303757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of the CAD-CAM and lost-wax framework fabrication techniques on the fracture strength of porcelain in metal-ceramic restorations.
    Tajziehchi G; Ansarilari H; Afshar K
    Dent Med Probl; 2023; 60(2):303-309. PubMed ID: 37246914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of the Marginal and Internal Fit of Implant-Supported Metal Copings Fabricated with 3 Different Techniques: An In Vitro Study.
    Yildirim B; Paken G
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Mar; 28(3):315-320. PubMed ID: 30667169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Effect of cementation and aging on the marginal fit of veneered and monolithic zirconia and metal-ceramic CAD-CAM crowns.
    Del Piñal M; Lopez-Suarez C; Bartolome JF; Volpato CA; Suarez MJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Feb; 125(2):323.e1-323.e7. PubMed ID: 33176924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of Different CAM Strategies on the Fit of Partial Crown Restorations: A Digital Three-dimensional Evaluation.
    Zimmermann M; Valcanaia A; Neiva G; Mehl A; Fasbinder D
    Oper Dent; 2018; 43(5):530-538. PubMed ID: 29630483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of the Adaptation of Interim Crowns using Different Measurement Techniques.
    Peng CC; Chung KH; Ramos V
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Jan; 29(1):87-93. PubMed ID: 31702087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.