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.
121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38443245)
1. 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]
2. Influence of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of four intraoral scanners for fabricating tooth-supported crowns. Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M; Barmak AB; Yilmaz B; Kois JC; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38641480 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system. Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M; Drone M; Barmak AB; Att W; Kois JC; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jan; ():. PubMed ID: 38267350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of Implant Scanbody Material and Intraoral Scanner 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; 2023 Sep; 0(0):0. PubMed ID: 37729480 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Scanning accuracy and scanning area discrepancies of intraoral digital scans acquired at varying scanning distances and angulations among 4 different intraoral scanners. Button H; Kois JC; Barmak AB; Zeitler JM; Rutkunas V; Revilla-León M J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 36872156 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of apical finish line location of tooth preparations on the scanning accuracy of intraoral scanners with various focal lengths and scanning technologies. Revilla-León M; Fry E; Zeitler JM; Li J; Barmak AB; Kois JC; Pérez-Barquero JA J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Aug; ():. PubMed ID: 39153939 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system. Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M; Drone M; Barmak AB; Guinot-Barona C; Att W; Kois JC; Alonso Pérez-Barquero J J Dent; 2024 Mar; 142():104854. PubMed ID: 38246309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Influence of implant angulation and clinical implant scan body height on the accuracy of complete arch intraoral digital scans. Gómez-Polo M; Sallorenzo A; Ortega R; Gómez-Polo C; Barmak AB; Att W; Revilla-León M J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jan; 131(1):119-127. PubMed ID: 35337658 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of the ambient color lighting on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using two intraoral scanners. Ochoa-López G; Revilla-León M; Gómez-Polo M J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38653690 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Differences in maxillomandibular relationship recorded at centric relation when using a conventional method, four intraoral scanners, and a jaw tracking system: A clinical study. Revilla-León M; Agustín-Panadero R; Zeitler JM; Barmak AB; Yilmaz B; Kois JC; Pérez-Barquero JA J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Jan; ():. PubMed ID: 36682896 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy of different digital acquisition methods in complete arch implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. Pinto RJ; Casado SA; Chmielewski K; Caramês JM; Marques DS J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jul; 132(1):172-177. PubMed ID: 37620183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Influence of operator experience, scanner type, and scan size on 3D scans. Resende CCD; Barbosa TAQ; Moura GF; Tavares LDN; Rizzante FAP; George FM; Neves FDD; Mendonça G J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Feb; 125(2):294-299. PubMed ID: 32115221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of the maxillomandibular relationship at centric relation position recorded by using 3 different intraoral scanners with or without an optical jaw tracking system: An in vivo pilot study. Revilla-León M; Fernández-Estevan L; Barmak AB; Kois JC; Pérez-Barquero JA J Dent; 2023 May; 132():104478. PubMed ID: 36889536 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of single implant scans with a combined healing abutment-scan body system and different intraoral scanners: An in vitro study. Çakmak G; Donmez MB; Atalay S; Yilmaz H; Kökat AM; Yilmaz B J Dent; 2021 Oct; 113():103773. PubMed ID: 34384842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. In Vitro Trueness and Precision of Intraoral Scanners in a Four-Implant Complete-Arch Model. Spagopoulos D; Kaisarlis G; Spagopoulou F; Halazonetis DJ; Güth JF; Papazoglou E Dent J (Basel); 2023 Jan; 11(1):. PubMed ID: 36661564 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]