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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37746813)

  • 1. Accuracy of intraoral scan with prefabricated aids and stereophotogrammetry compared with open tray impressions for complete-arch implant-supported prosthesis: A clinical study.
    Fu XJ; Liu M; Liu BL; Tonetti MS; Shi JY; Lai HC
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 Aug; 35(8):830-840. PubMed ID: 37746813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of traditional open-tray impression, stereophotogrammetry, and intraoral scanning with prefabricated aids for implant-supported complete arch prostheses with different implant distributions: An in vitro study.
    Liu M; Fu XJ; Lai HC; Shi JY; Liu BL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Sep; 132(3):602.e1-602.e9. PubMed ID: 38991886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impression with intraoral optical scanning and stereophotogrammetry: An in vivo prospective comparative study.
    Pozzi A; Carosi P; Gallucci GO; Nagy K; Nardi A; Arcuri L
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2023 Oct; 34(10):1106-1117. PubMed ID: 37485737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of 2 direct digital scanning techniques-intraoral scanning and stereophotogrammetry-for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: A prospective study.
    Yan Y; Lin X; Yue X; Geng W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Oct; 130(4):564-572. PubMed ID: 35667889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry.
    Cheng J; Zhang H; Liu H; Li J; Wang HL; Tao X
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 May; 35(5):560-572. PubMed ID: 38421115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of intraoral optical scan versus stereophotogrammetry for complete-arch digital implant impression: An in vitro study.
    Pozzi A; Agliardi E; Lio F; Nagy K; Nardi A; Arcuri L
    J Prosthodont Res; 2024 Jan; 68(1):172-180. PubMed ID: 37574278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing the accuracy of full-arch implant impressions using the conventional technique and digital scans with and without prefabricated landmarks in the mandible: An in vitro study.
    Ke Y; Zhang Y; Wang Y; Chen H; Sun Y
    J Dent; 2023 Aug; 135():104561. PubMed ID: 37236297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine.
    Revilla-León M; Att W; Özcan M; Rubenstein J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Mar; 125(3):470-478. PubMed ID: 32386912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Accuracy of intraoral scanning using modified scan bodies for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses.
    Li Y; Fang H; Yan Y; Geng W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 39079817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Prosthesis accuracy of fit on 3D-printed casts versus stone casts: A comparative study in the anterior maxilla.
    Abdeen L; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2022 Dec; 34(8):1238-1246. PubMed ID: 36415927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fit of complete-arch implant-supported prostheses produced from an intraoral scan by using an auxiliary device and from an elastomeric impression: A pilot clinical trial.
    Roig E; Roig M; Garza LC; Costa S; Maia P; Espona J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):404-414. PubMed ID: 33610331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy of photogrammetric imaging versus conventional impressions for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A comparative clinical study.
    Zhang YJ; Qian SJ; Lai HC; Shi JY
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Aug; 130(2):212-218. PubMed ID: 34776266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Calibrated intraoral scan protocol (CISP) for full-arch implant impressions: An in vitro comparison to conventional impression, intraoral scan, and intraoral scan with scan-aid.
    Li J; Chen Z; Nava P; Yang S; Calatrava J; Wang HL
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2024 Oct; 26(5):879-888. PubMed ID: 38747500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review.
    Michelinakis G; Apostolakis D; Kamposiora P; Papavasiliou G; Özcan M
    BMC Oral Health; 2021 Jan; 21(1):37. PubMed ID: 33478459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Effect of simulated intraoral variables on the accuracy of a photogrammetric imaging technique for complete-arch implant prostheses.
    Bratos M; Bergin JM; Rubenstein JE; Sorensen JA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Aug; 120(2):232-241. PubMed ID: 29559220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Digital assessment of the accuracy of implant impression techniques in free end saddle partially edentulous patients. A controlled clinical trial.
    Dohiem MM; Abdelaziz MS; Abdalla MF; Fawzy AM
    BMC Oral Health; 2022 Nov; 22(1):486. PubMed ID: 36371189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of digital implant impressions using a novel structured light scanning system assisted by a planar mirror in the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study.
    Ke Y; Zhang Y; Tian S; Chen H; Sun Y
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2024 Aug; 35(8):876-887. PubMed ID: 37933413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.