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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36055812)

  • 21. A Comparison of Denture Base Retention and Adaptation Between CAD/CAM and Conventional Fabrication Techniques.
    Faty MA; Sabet ME; Thabet YG
    Int J Prosthodont; 2023 Sep; 36(4):469-478. PubMed ID: 37699188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Intraoral optical impression versus conventional impression for fully edentulous maxilla: an in vivo comparative study.
    Willmann C; Deschamps A; Taddei-Gross C; Musset AM; Lai C; Etienne O
    Int J Comput Dent; 2024 Mar; 27(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 36815624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. In vitro comparative study between complete arch conventional implant impressions and digital implant scans with scannable pick-up impression copings.
    Conejo J; Yoo TH; Atria PJ; Fraiman H; Blatz MB
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Mar; 131(3):475.e1-475.e7. PubMed ID: 38182453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effects of fabrication techniques on denture base adaptation: An in vitro study.
    Hsu CY; Yang TC; Wang TM; Lin LD
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Dec; 124(6):740-747. PubMed ID: 32448642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Accuracy and reproducibility of virtual edentulous casts created by laboratory impression scan protocols.
    Peng L; Chen L; Harris BT; Bhandari B; Morton D; Lin WS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Sep; 120(3):389-395. PubMed ID: 29703675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of the trueness and tissue surface adaptation of CAD-CAM mandibular denture bases manufactured using digital light processing.
    Yoon HI; Hwang HJ; Ohkubo C; Han JS; Park EJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Dec; 120(6):919-926. PubMed ID: 29961610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [Accuracy and retention of denture bases fabricated by injection molding, milling, and three-dimensional printing].
    Li D; Yang ST; Yuan Q; Mo AC; Yue L
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2022 Sep; 57(9):927-931. PubMed ID: 36097939
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effect of build angle on the tissue surface adaptation of maxillary and mandibular complete denture bases manufactured by digital light processing.
    Jin MC; Yoon HI; Yeo IS; Kim SH; Han JS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Mar; 123(3):473-482. PubMed ID: 31227240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. In vitro accuracy of digital and conventional impressions in the partially edentulous maxilla.
    Waldecker M; Rues S; Awounvo Awounvo JS; Rammelsberg P; Bömicke W
    Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Nov; 26(11):6491-6502. PubMed ID: 35778534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Additively manufactured CAD-CAM complete dentures with intraoral scanning and cast digitization: A controlled clinical trial.
    Al-Kaff FT; Al Hamad KQ
    J Prosthodont; 2024 Jan; 33(1):27-33. PubMed ID: 37200587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [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]  

  • 32. Evaluation of a novel 3D-printed custom tray for the impressions of edentulous jaws.
    Deng K; Chen H; Wang Y; Zhou Y; Sun Y
    J Dent; 2022 Oct; 125():104279. PubMed ID: 36070825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Edentulous jaw impression techniques: An in vivo comparison of trueness.
    Chebib N; Kalberer N; Srinivasan M; Maniewicz S; Perneger T; Müller F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Apr; 121(4):623-630. PubMed ID: 30580982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of denture base adaptation between additive and conventional fabrication techniques.
    Tosun ON; Bilmenoglu C; Özdemir AK
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Mar; 32(3):e64-e70. PubMed ID: 36495146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Different implant impression techniques for edentulous patients treated with CAD/CAM complete-arch prostheses: a randomised controlled trial reporting data at 3 year post-loading.
    Pozzi A; Tallarico M; Mangani F; Barlattani A
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2013; 6(4):325-40. PubMed ID: 24570979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions for Whole Upper Jaws, Including Full Dentitions and Palatal Soft Tissues.
    Gan N; Xiong Y; Jiao T
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0158800. PubMed ID: 27383409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Fit Accuracy of Complete Denture Base Fabricated by CAD/CAM Milling and 3D-Printing Methods.
    Charoenphol K; Peampring C
    Eur J Dent; 2023 Jul; 17(3):889-894. PubMed ID: 36513334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The trueness of scans using one intraoral scanner in different partially edentulous conditions.
    Majeed-Saidan A; Dutra V; Levon JA; Chu TG; Morton D; Alfaraj A; Lin WS
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Aug; 32(7):588-593. PubMed ID: 35977883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Quantitative analysis of the selective pressure impression technique using CAD-CAM technology: A pilot clinical study.
    Stein BE; Yoon HI; Mattie H; Lee SJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Dec; 128(6):1289-1294. PubMed ID: 33992466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.