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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37681471)

  • 21. Use of an Intraoral Laser Scanner During the Prosthetic Phase of Implant Dentistry: A Pilot Study.
    Lee CY; Wong N; Ganz SD; Mursic J; Suzuki JB
    J Oral Implantol; 2015 Aug; 41(4):e126-32. PubMed ID: 24967654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy.
    Revilla-León M; Lanis A; Yilmaz B; Kois JC; Gallucci GO
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(S2):150-164. PubMed ID: 37586762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Reverse scan body: The scan pattern affects the fit of complete-arch prototype prostheses.
    Papaspyridakos P; Bedrossian EA; Ntovas P; Kudara Y; Bokhary A; Chochlidakis K
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Dec; 32(S2):186-191. PubMed ID: 37721306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Digital verification and correction of digital intraoral scans for fixed implant rehabilitation of edentulous arches: A dental technique.
    Negreiros WM; Chanting Sun T; Gallucci GO; Hamilton A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Mar; 129(3):395-399. PubMed ID: 34229898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparative study of the accuracy of an implant intraoral scanner and that of a conventional intraoral scanner for complete-arch fixed dental prostheses.
    Sallorenzo A; Gómez-Polo M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1009-1016. PubMed ID: 33836855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review.
    Joda T; Zarone F; Ferrari M
    BMC Oral Health; 2017 Sep; 17(1):124. PubMed ID: 28927393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Accuracy of photogrammetry, intraoral scanning, and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an in vitro comparative study.
    Ma B; Yue X; Sun Y; Peng L; Geng W
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Dec; 21(1):636. PubMed ID: 34893053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Continuous Scan Strategy (CSS): A Novel Technique to Improve the Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions.
    Imburgia M; Kois J; Marino E; Lerner H; Mangano FG
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2020 Aug; 28(3):128-141. PubMed ID: 32750237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A clinical study comparing digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported prostheses: A crossover clinical trial.
    Lee SJ; Jamjoom FZ; Le T; Radics A; Gallucci GO
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Jul; 128(1):42-48. PubMed ID: 33602542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes.
    Papaspyridakos P; Gallucci GO; Chen CJ; Hanssen S; Naert I; Vandenberghe B
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Apr; 27(4):465-72. PubMed ID: 25682892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Accuracy of implant impression techniques with a scannable healing abutment.
    Jung HT; Kim HY; Song SY; Park JH; Lee JY
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Oct; 128(4):729-734. PubMed ID: 33832762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Use of intraoral scan for implant-supported dental prosthesis to design and fabricate a CAD-CAM verification device: A dental technique.
    Su FY; Tsai JC; Morton D; Lin WS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Feb; 125(2):204-207. PubMed ID: 32307114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Accuracy of Digital Impressions at Varying Implant Depths: An In Vitro Study.
    Sequeira V; Harper MT; Lilly CL; Bryington MS
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Jan; 32(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 35191128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Does the geometry of scan bodies affect the alignment accuracy of computer-aided design in implant digital workflow: An in vitro study?
    Pan Y; Tsoi JKH; Lam WYH; Chen Z; Pow EHN
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2022 Mar; 33(3):313-321. PubMed ID: 34971468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Accuracy of single implant scans with a combined healing abutment-scan body system and different intraoral scanners: An in vitro study.
    Çakmak G; Donmez MB; Atalay S; Yilmaz H; Kökat AM; Yilmaz B
    J Dent; 2021 Oct; 113():103773. PubMed ID: 34384842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Do Type and Shape of Scan Bodies Affect Accuracy and Time of Digital Implant Impressions?
    Moslemion M; Payaminia L; Jalali H; Alikhasi M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2020 Feb; 28(1):18-27. PubMed ID: 32036633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The current clinical relevancy of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry.
    Sawase T; Kuroshima S
    Dent Mater J; 2020 Jan; 39(1):57-61. PubMed ID: 31723067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A fully digital approach to replicate functional and aesthetic parameters in implant-supported full-arch rehabilitation.
    Monaco C; Ragazzini N; Scheda L; Evangelisti E
    J Prosthodont Res; 2018 Jul; 62(3):383-385. PubMed ID: 29191608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.