230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35629010)
21. 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]
22. Cantilever Lengths and Anterior-Posterior Spreads of Interim, Acrylic Resin, Full-Arch Screw-Retained Prostheses and Their Relationship to Prosthetic Complications.
Drago C
J Prosthodont; 2017 Aug; 26(6):502-507. PubMed ID: 26848820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. [Pure titanium denture large-span frameworks additively manufactured with selective laser melting].
Luo XP; Wei YX; Huang HN; Hu DD; Pang EL
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Jul; 56(7):646-651. PubMed ID: 34275219
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Conventional versus Digital Impressions for Full Arch Screw-Retained Maxillary Rehabilitations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Cappare P; Sannino G; Minoli M; Montemezzi P; Ferrini F
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2019 Mar; 16(5):. PubMed ID: 30866465
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Merging intraoral scans and CBCT: a novel technique for improving the accuracy of 3D digital models for implant-supported complete-arch fixed dental prostheses.
Gómez-Polo M; Ballesteros J; Padilla PP; Pulido PP; Revilla-León M; Ortega R
Int J Comput Dent; 2021 Jun; 24(2):117-123. PubMed ID: 34085497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [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]
27. [Comparison of the registration methods for the three-dimensional facial scans applied to the design of full-arch implant supported restoration].
Guo DN; Pan SX; Heng MD; Qu J; Wei XX; Zhou YS
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2020 Dec; 53(1):83-87. PubMed ID: 33550340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Accuracy of 3-dimensional computer-aided manufactured single-tooth implant definitive casts.
Buda M; Bratos M; Sorensen JA
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Dec; 120(6):913-918. PubMed ID: 29961627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Digital workflow: In vitro accuracy of 3D printed casts generated from complete-arch digital implant scans.
Papaspyridakos P; Chen YW; Alshawaf B; Kang K; Finkelman M; Chronopoulos V; Weber HP
J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Nov; 124(5):589-593. PubMed ID: 31959396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Maxillary and mandibular complete-arch implant rehabilitation using a complete digital workflow: A case report.
Ahmed WM; Alhazmi A; Alharbi MT; Azhari AA; Alqarni H; Shaheen HF; Mitwalli ET
J Prosthodont; 2023 Oct; 32(8):662-668. PubMed ID: 36905084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A fully digital approach for implant fixed complete dentures: A case report.
Meneghetti P; Moura GF; Tavelli L; Li J; Siqueira R; Wang HL; Mendonça G
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2021 Dec; 33(8):1070-1076. PubMed ID: 34213055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses.
Mizumoto RM; Yilmaz B; McGlumphy EA; Seidt J; Johnston WM
J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):96-104. PubMed ID: 31040026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A Technique for Digital Impression and Bite Registration for a Single Edentulous Arch.
Fang Y; Fang JH; Jeong SM; Choi BH
J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e519-e523. PubMed ID: 29522269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of Milled Full-Arch Implant-Supported Frameworks Realised with a Full Digital Workflow or from Conventional Impression: A Clinical Study.
Pera F; Pesce P; Bagnasco F; Pancini N; Carossa M; Baldelli L; Annunziata M; Migliorati M; Baldi D; Menini M
Materials (Basel); 2023 Jan; 16(2):. PubMed ID: 36676569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparison of digital and silicone impressions for single-tooth implants and two- and three-unit implants for a free-end edentulous saddle.
Nagata K; Fuchigami K; Okuhama Y; Wakamori K; Tsuruoka H; Nakashizu T; Hoshi N; Atsumi M; Kimoto K; Kawana H
BMC Oral Health; 2021 Sep; 21(1):464. PubMed ID: 34556111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions.
Albayrak B; Sukotjo C; Wee AG; Korkmaz İH; Bayındır F
J Prosthodont; 2021 Feb; 30(2):163-170. PubMed ID: 32935894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Influence of scan body design and digital implant analogs on implant replica position in additively manufactured casts.
Revilla-León M; Fogarty R; Barrington JJ; Zandinejad A; Özcan M
J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Aug; 124(2):202-210. PubMed ID: 31787272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Digital Workflow for Fixed Implant Rehabilitation of an Extremely Atrophic Edentulous Mandible in Three Appointments.
Papaspyridakos P; Rajput N; Kudara Y; Weber HP
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2017 May; 29(3):178-188. PubMed ID: 28316122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Computer-assisted implant placement and full-arch immediate loading with digitally prefabricated provisional prostheses without cast: a prospective pilot cohort study.
Makarov N; Pompa G; Papi P
Int J Implant Dent; 2021 Sep; 7(1):80. PubMed ID: 34486078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
