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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37748996)

  • 1. A comparative evaluation of photogrammetry software programs and conventional impression techniques for the fabrication of nasal maxillofacial prostheses.
    Buzayan MM; Elkezza AH; Ahmad SF; Mohd Salleh N; Sivakumar I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 37748996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of accuracy of photogrammetry with 3D scanning and conventional impression method for craniomaxillofacial defects using a software analysis.
    Beri A; Pisulkar SK; Bagde AD; Bansod A; Dahihandekar C; Paikrao B
    Trials; 2022 Dec; 23(1):1048. PubMed ID: 36575547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. [Accuracy of photogrammetry and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an
    Sun YJ; Ma BW; Yue XX; Lin X; Geng W
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2022 Feb; 57(2):168-172. PubMed ID: 35152653
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Accuracy of capturing oncology facial defects with multimodal image fusion versus laser scanning.
    Jablonski RY; Osnes CA; Khambay BS; Nattress BR; Keeling AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Sep; 122(3):333-338. PubMed ID: 30955940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of Digital vs Conventional Implant Impression Approach: A Three-Dimensional Comparative In Vitro Analysis.
    Basaki K; Alkumru H; De Souza G; Finer Y
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2017; 32(4):792–799. PubMed ID: 28618432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of printed casts generated from digital implant impressions versus stone casts from conventional implant impressions: A comparative in vitro study.
    Alshawaf B; Weber HP; Finkelman M; El Rafie K; Kudara Y; Papaspyridakos P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Aug; 29(8):835-842. PubMed ID: 29926977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital impressions in dentistry-accuracy of impression digitalisation by desktop scanners.
    Runkel C; Güth JF; Erdelt K; Keul C
    Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Mar; 24(3):1249-1257. PubMed ID: 31302771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods.
    Cho SH; Schaefer O; Thompson GA; Guentsch A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):310-5. PubMed ID: 25682531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Digital workflow: In vitro accuracy of 3D printed casts generated from complete-arch digital implant scans.
    Papaspyridakos P; Chen YW; Alshawaf B; Kang K; Finkelman M; Chronopoulos V; Weber HP
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Nov; 124(5):589-593. PubMed ID: 31959396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of 3-dimensional computer-aided manufactured single-tooth implant definitive casts.
    Buda M; Bratos M; Sorensen JA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Dec; 120(6):913-918. PubMed ID: 29961627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Trueness of 3-dimensionally printed complete arch implant analog casts.
    Gagnon-Audet A; An H; Jensen UF; Bratos M; Sorensen JA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Aug; ():. PubMed ID: 37558526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Accuracy of 3D Printed Implant Casts Versus Stone Casts: A Comparative Study in the Anterior Maxilla.
    Banjar A; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Prosthodont; 2021 Dec; 30(9):783-788. PubMed ID: 33474754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Generation and evaluation of 3D digital casts of maxillary defects based on multisource data registration: A pilot clinical study.
    Ye H; Ma Q; Hou Y; Li M; Zhou Y
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Dec; 118(6):790-795. PubMed ID: 28449864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Interproximal distance analysis of stereolithographic casts made by CAD-CAM technology: An in vitro study.
    Hoffman M; Cho SH; Bansal NK
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Nov; 118(5):624-630. PubMed ID: 28477918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.