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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38262586)

  • 1. Objective assessment of simulated non-carious cervical lesion by tridimensional digital scanning - An in vitro study.
    Denucci GC; Alzahrani L; O'Toole S; Turssi CP; Hara AT
    J Dent; 2024 Mar; 142():104851. PubMed ID: 38262586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Objective assessment of simulated non-carious cervical lesion by tridimensional digital scanning.
    Charamba CF; Needy J; Ungar PS; de Sousa FB; Eckert GJ; Hara AT
    Clin Oral Investig; 2021 Jun; 25(6):4069-4074. PubMed ID: 33464418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Monitoring of Erosive Tooth Wear with Intraoral Scanners In vitro.
    Witecy C; Ganss C; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MB; Schlenz MA
    Caries Res; 2021; 55(3):215-224. PubMed ID: 33752205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Influence of Scanner Precision and Analysis Software in Quantifying Three-Dimensional Intraoral Changes: Two-Factor Factorial Experimental Design.
    O'Toole S; Bartlett D; Keeling A; McBride J; Bernabe E; Crins L; Loomans B
    J Med Internet Res; 2020 Nov; 22(11):e17150. PubMed ID: 33245280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 3D-Image analysis of the impact of toothpaste abrasivity on the progression of simulated non-carious cervical lesions.
    Sabrah AH; Turssi CP; Lippert F; Eckert GJ; Kelly AB; Hara AT
    J Dent; 2018 Jun; 73():14-18. PubMed ID: 29597039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. A depth-resolved quantitative evaluation method for non-carious cervical lesions treatment with optical coherence tomography.
    Kim Y; Son K; Han S; Seong D; Lee E; Lee KB; Jeon M; Kim J
    J Dent; 2024 May; 144():104894. PubMed ID: 38521238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Rydén J; Thor A
    J Dent; 2018 Feb; 69():110-118. PubMed ID: 29246490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The precision of two alternative indirect workflows for digital model production: an illusion or a possibility?
    Elkersh NM; Fahmy RA; Zayet MK; Gaweesh YS; Hassan MG
    Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Jul; 27(7):3787-3797. PubMed ID: 37046002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Detecting early erosive tooth wear using an intraoral scanner system.
    Michou S; Vannahme C; Ekstrand KR; Benetti AR
    J Dent; 2020 Sep; 100():103445. PubMed ID: 32750388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Monitoring erosive tooth wear with intraoral 3D scanner: A feasibility study.
    Machado AC; Phillips TS; Zimmerman R; Scaramucci T; Amaechi BT
    Am J Dent; 2022 Feb; 35(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 35316593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reliability of digital repeated-scan superimposition and single-scan techniques for wear volume loss assessment on flat surfaces.
    Wan Q; Daher R; Lee H; Kwon HB; Han JS; Lee JH
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104738. PubMed ID: 37806382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Toothbrush bristle configuration and brushing load: Effect on the development of simulated non-carious cervical lesions.
    Turssi CP; Kelly AB; Hara AT
    J Dent; 2019 Jul; 86():75-80. PubMed ID: 31129277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Optical profilometry versus intraoral (handheld) scanning.
    Hartkamp O; Peters F; Bothung H; Lohbauer U; Reich S
    Int J Comput Dent; 2017; 20(2):165-176. PubMed ID: 28630957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Intraoral 3D Scanning or Dental Impressions for the Assessment of Dental Arch Relationships in Cleft Care: Which is Superior?
    Chalmers EV; McIntyre GT; Wang W; Gillgrass T; Martin CB; Mossey PA
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2016 Sep; 53(5):568-77. PubMed ID: 26623548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Interplay between toothbrush stiffness and dentifrice abrasivity on the development of non-carious cervical lesions.
    Turssi CP; Binsaleh F; Lippert F; Bottino MC; Eckert GJ; Moser EAS; Hara AT
    Clin Oral Investig; 2019 Sep; 23(9):3551-3556. PubMed ID: 30607621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Thor A
    BMC Oral Health; 2018 Feb; 18(1):27. PubMed ID: 29471825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.