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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37729480)

  • 1. Influence of Implant ScanBody Material and Intraoral Scanners on the Accuracy of Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impressions.
    Azevedo L; Marques T; Karasan D; Fehmer V; Sailer I; Correia A; Gómez Polo M
    Int J Prosthodont; 2024 Sep; 37(5):575-582. PubMed ID: 37729480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of splinting scan bodies on the trueness of complete arch digital implant scans with 5 different intraoral scanners.
    Azevedo L; Marques T; Karasan D; Fehmer V; Sailer I; Correia A; Gómez-Polo M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; 132(1):204-210. PubMed ID: 37537105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of implant scan body geometric modifications on the trueness and scanning time of complete arch intraoral implant digital scans: An in vitro study.
    Lawand G; Ismail Y; Revilla-León M; Tohme H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jun; 131(6):1189-1197. PubMed ID: 35864021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Trueness and precision of complete arch dentate digital models produced by intraoral and desktop scanners: An ex-vivo study.
    Vag J; Stevens CD; Badahman MH; Ludlow M; Sharp M; Brenes C; Mennito A; Renne W
    J Dent; 2023 Dec; 139():104764. PubMed ID: 37898433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Effect of scan powder and scanning technology on measured deviations of complete-arch implant supported frameworks digitized with industrial and intraoral scanners.
    Donmez MB; Çakmak G; Dede DÖ; Küçükekenci AS; Lu WE; Schumacher FL; Revilla-León M; Yilmaz B
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104736. PubMed ID: 37802291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions when Using and Varying the Material and Diameter of the Dental Implant Scan Bodies.
    Althubaitiy R; Sambrook R; Weisbloom M; Petridis H
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2022 Nov; 30(4):305-313. PubMed ID: 35438267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of a chairside reverse scanbody workflow for a complete arch implant-supported prosthesis using four intraoral scanners versus a desktop scanner.
    Nuytens P; Vandeweghe S; D'haese R
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104717. PubMed ID: 37739058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of intraoral and laboratory scanners to an industrial-grade scanner while analyzing the fabrication trueness of polymer and titanium complete-arch implant-supported frameworks.
    Yilmaz B; Dede DÖ; Donmez MB; Küçükekenci AS; Lu WE; Schumacher FL; Çakmak G
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104697. PubMed ID: 37696469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Influence of implant scanbody material, position and operator on the accuracy of digital impression for complete-arch: A randomized in vitro trial.
    Arcuri L; Pozzi A; Lio F; Rompen E; Zechner W; Nardi A
    J Prosthodont Res; 2020 Apr; 64(2):128-136. PubMed ID: 31255546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system.
    Revilla-León M; Barmak AB; Lanis A; Kois JC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38443245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.
    Meneghetti PC; Li J; Borella PS; Mendonça G; Burnett LH
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(12):e0295790. PubMed ID: 38113200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Characteristics of intraoral scan bodies and their influence on impression accuracy: A systematic review.
    Pachiou A; Zervou E; Tsirogiannis P; Sykaras N; Tortopidis D; Kourtis S
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2023 Dec; 35(8):1205-1217. PubMed ID: 37381677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of conventional impressions and digital scans for implant-supported fixed prostheses in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism: An in vitro study.
    El Osta N; Drancourt N; Auduc C; Veyrune JL; Nicolas E
    J Dent; 2024 Apr; 143():104892. PubMed ID: 38367825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of occlusal collision corrections completed by two intraoral scanners or a dental design program on the accuracy of the maxillomandibular relationship.
    Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M; Barmak AB; Kois JC; Yilmaz B; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; 132(1):191-203. PubMed ID: 37365066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of the accuracy between conventional and various digital implant impressions for an implant-supported mandibular complete arch-fixed prosthesis: An in vitro study.
    Kosago P; Ungurawasaporn C; Kukiattrakoon B
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Aug; 32(7):616-624. PubMed ID: 36083233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.