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 *

160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38304652)

  • 41. Accuracy of single-unit ceramic crown fabrication after digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Manisha J; Srivastava G; Das SS; Tabarak N; Choudhury GK
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2023; 23(2):105-111. PubMed ID: 37102534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Marginal and internal adaptation of single crowns and fixed dental prostheses by using digital and conventional workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Hasanzade M; Aminikhah M; Afrashtehfar KI; Alikhasi M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Sep; 126(3):360-368. PubMed ID: 32928518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Accuracy of digital implant impressions with intraoral scanners. A systematic review.
    Rutkūnas V; Gečiauskaitė A; Jegelevičius D; Vaitiekūnas M
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2017; 10 Suppl 1():101-120. PubMed ID: 28944372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. ACCURACY OF INTRAORAL SCANNERS VERSUS TRADITIONAL IMPRESSIONS: A RAPID UMBRELLA REVIEW.
    Afrashtehfar KI; Alnakeb NA; Assery MKM
    J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2022 Sep; 22(3):101719. PubMed ID: 36162879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Clinical outcomes of digital scans versus conventional impressions for implant-supported fixed complete arch prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Reis INRD; Chamma-Wedemann CN; Silva IAO; Spin-Neto R; Sesma N; da Silva EVF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Oct; ():. PubMed ID: 37865553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure.
    Menini M; Setti P; Pera F; Pera P; Pesce P
    Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Apr; 22(3):1253-1262. PubMed ID: 28965251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations.
    Al-Abdullah K; Zandparsa R; Finkelman M; Hirayama H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Aug; 110(2):90-100. PubMed ID: 23929370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Accuracy of impressions for multiple implants: A comparative study of digital and conventional techniques.
    Lyu M; Di P; Lin Y; Jiang X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1017-1023. PubMed ID: 33640093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Does Splinting the Direct Copings Increase the Impression Accuracy of Two-Unit Nonparallel Implant Restorations? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    Ma Y; Al-Radhi RYZ; Jiang L; Yu H
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(4):653-659. PubMed ID: 35904821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. 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]  

  • 52. Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions-An In Vitro Study.
    Ribeiro P; Herrero-Climent M; Díaz-Castro C; Ríos-Santos JV; Padrós R; Mur JG; Falcão C
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2018 Jul; 15(8):. PubMed ID: 30060540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. 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]  

  • 54. Clinical outcomes of implant-supported and tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital versus analogue impression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Mahat NS; Shetty NY; Kohli S; Jamayet NB; Patil P
    Evid Based Dent; 2023 Sep; 24(3):142. PubMed ID: 37369705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions.
    Albayrak B; Sukotjo C; Wee AG; Korkmaz İH; Bayındır F
    J Prosthodont; 2021 Feb; 30(2):163-170. PubMed ID: 32935894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Precision and practical usefulness of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry: A systematic literature review.
    García-Gil I; Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann J; Jiménez-García J; Peláez-Rico J; Suárez-García MJ
    J Clin Exp Dent; 2020 Aug; 12(8):e784-e793. PubMed ID: 32913577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Linear Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Full-Arch Impressions of Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Floriani F; Lopes GC; Cabrera A; Duarte W; Zoidis P; Oliveira D; Rocha MG
    Eur J Dent; 2023 Oct; 17(4):964-973. PubMed ID: 36716787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Accuracy of marginal adaptation of posterior fixed dental prosthesis made from digital impression technique: A systematic review.
    Kumar HC; Kumar TP; Hemchand S; Suneelkumar C; Subha A
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2020; 20(2):123-130. PubMed ID: 32655216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. 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]  

  • 60. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Impression Techniques for Implant Restorations.
    Moura RV; Kojima AN; Saraceni CHC; Bassolli L; Balducci I; Özcan M; Mesquita AMM
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e530-e535. PubMed ID: 29717518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.