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.
179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36334784)
1. The trueness of an intraoral scanner in scanning different post space depths. Elter B; Diker B; Tak Ö J Dent; 2022 Dec; 127():104352. PubMed ID: 36334784 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Positional trueness of abutments by using a digital die-merging protocol compared with complete arch direct digital scans and conventional dental impressions. Jelicich A; Scialabba R; Lee SJ J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Feb; 131(2):293-300. PubMed ID: 35430047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of the accuracy of direct intraoral scanner impressions for digital post and core in various post lengths: An in-vitro study. Almalki A; Conejo J; Kutkut N; Blatz M; Hai Q; Anadioti E J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 Apr; 36(4):673-679. PubMed ID: 37921014 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions. Carbajal Mejía JB; Wakabayashi K; Nakamura T; Yatani H J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Sep; 118(3):392-399. PubMed ID: 28222873 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. Ender A; Zimmermann M; Mehl A Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 30848250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Error propagation from intraoral scanning to additive manufacturing of complete-arch dentate models: An in vitro study. Auškalnis L; Akulauskas M; Jegelevičius D; Simonaitis T; Rutkūnas V J Dent; 2022 Jun; 121():104136. PubMed ID: 35460866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Effect of different intraoral scanners and post-space depths on the trueness of digital impressions. Emam M; Ghanem L; Abdel Sadek HM Dent Med Probl; 2024; 61(4):577-584. PubMed ID: 37070711 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy of six intraoral scanners for scanning complete-arch and 4-unit fixed partial dentures: An in vitro study. Diker B; Tak Ö J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Aug; 128(2):187-194. PubMed ID: 33558056 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of different scanning strategies on the accuracy of two current intraoral scanning systems in complete-arch impressions: an in vitro study. Passos L; Meiga S; Brigagão V; Street A Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(4):307-319. PubMed ID: 31840139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Scan time and accuracy of full-arch scans with intraoral scanners: a comparative study on conditions of the intraoral head-simulator and the hand-held model]. Wu MT; Tang SX; Peng LY; Han YT; Su YC; Wang X Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Jun; 56(6):570-575. PubMed ID: 34098673 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of substrate adjacent to the scan region on the trueness of four intraoral scanners: An in vitro study. Elter B; Tak Ö J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104729. PubMed ID: 37778497 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accuracy of a chairside intraoral scanner compared with a laboratory scanner for the completely edentulous maxilla: An in vitro 3-dimensional comparative analysis. Zarone F; Ruggiero G; Ferrari M; Mangano F; Joda T; Sorrentino R J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Dec; 124(6):761.e1-761.e7. PubMed ID: 33289647 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of rescanning mesh holes on the accuracy of an intraoral scanner: An in vivo study. Revilla-León M; Quesada-Olmo N; Gómez-Polo M; Sicilia E; Farjas-Abadia M; Kois JC J Dent; 2021 Dec; 115():103851. PubMed ID: 34656658 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy of impressions for multiple implants: A comparative study of digital and conventional techniques. Lyu M; Di P; Lin Y; Jiang X J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1017-1023. PubMed ID: 33640093 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of impression-making methods in edentulous arches: An in vitro study encompassing conventional and digital methods. Li J; Moon HS; Kim JH; Yoon HI; Oh KC J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):479-486. PubMed ID: 33583617 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of definitive and interim restorative materials and surface finishing on the scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner. Revilla-León M; Young K; Sicilia E; Cho SH; Kois JC J Dent; 2022 May; 120():104114. PubMed ID: 35358659 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]