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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38458380)

  • 21. Evaluation of the trueness and precision of conventional impressions versus digital scans for the all-on-four treatment in the maxillary arch: An in vitro study.
    Marshaha NJ; Azhari AA; Assery MK; Ahmed WM
    J Prosthodont; 2024 Feb; 33(2):171-179. PubMed ID: 36811911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Accuracy of computer-assisted template-based implant placement using conventional impression and scan model or intraoral digital impression: A randomised controlled trial with 1 year of follow-up.
    Tallarico M; Xhanari E; Kim YJ; Cocchi F; Martinolli M; Alushi A; Baldoni EE; Meloni SM
    Int J Oral Implantol (Berl); 2019; 12(2):197-206. PubMed ID: 31090750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.
    Meneghetti PC; Li J; Borella PS; Mendonça G; Burnett LH
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(12):e0295790. PubMed ID: 38113200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effect of novel prefabricated auxiliary devices attaching to scan bodies on the accuracy of intraoral scanning of complete-arch with multiple implants: An in-vitro study.
    Wu HK; Wang J; Chen G; Huang X; Deng F; Li Y
    J Dent; 2023 Nov; 138():104702. PubMed ID: 37714453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. In vitro comparative study between complete arch conventional implant impressions and digital implant scans with scannable pick-up impression copings.
    Conejo J; Yoo TH; Atria PJ; Fraiman H; Blatz MB
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Mar; 131(3):475.e1-475.e7. PubMed ID: 38182453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Do digital impressions have a greater accuracy for full-arch implant-supported reconstructions compared to conventional impressions? An
    Shaikh M; Lakha T; Kheur S; Qamri B; Kheur M
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2022; 22(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 36511075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Improving intraoral implant scanning with a novel auxiliary device: An in-vitro study.
    Pan Y; Tsoi JKH; Lam WY; Zhao K; Pow EH
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2021 Dec; 32(12):1466-1473. PubMed ID: 34545614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies: An in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation.
    Huang R; Liu Y; Huang B; Zhang C; Chen Z; Li Z
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2020 Jul; 31(7):625-633. PubMed ID: 32181919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Digital vs Conventional Implant Impressions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Papaspyridakos P; Vazouras K; Chen YW; Kotina E; Natto Z; Kang K; Chochlidakis K
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Oct; 29(8):660-678. PubMed ID: 32613641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes.
    Papaspyridakos P; Gallucci GO; Chen CJ; Hanssen S; Naert I; Vandenberghe B
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2016 Apr; 27(4):465-72. PubMed ID: 25682892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The influence of crown coverage on the accuracy of static guided implant surgery in partially edentulous models: An in vitro study.
    Wang ZY; Chao JR; Zheng JW; You M; Liu Y; Shen JF
    J Dent; 2021 Dec; 115():103882. PubMed ID: 34742831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Comparative study of the accuracy of an implant intraoral scanner and that of a conventional intraoral scanner for complete-arch fixed dental prostheses.
    Sallorenzo A; Gómez-Polo M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):1009-1016. PubMed ID: 33836855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. In-vitro accuracy of complete arch scans of the fully dentate and the partially edentulous maxilla.
    Waldecker M; Bömicke W; Behnisch R; Rammelsberg P; Rues S
    J Prosthodont Res; 2022 Oct; 66(4):538-545. PubMed ID: 34880160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Effect of scan-path length on the scanning accuracy of completely dentate and partially edentulous maxillae.
    Waldecker M; Rues S; Behnisch R; Rammelsberg P; Bömicke W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jan; 131(1):146-154. PubMed ID: 35367080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Digital Versus Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Prospective Study on 16 Edentulous Maxillae.
    Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P; Tsigarida A; Romeo D; Chen YW; Natto Z; Ercoli C
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Apr; 29(4):281-286. PubMed ID: 32166793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Accuracy of virtual interocclusal records for partially edentulous patients.
    Ren S; Morton D; Lin WS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jun; 123(6):860-865. PubMed ID: 31672422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Accuracy of Digital Impressions at Varying Implant Depths: An In Vitro Study.
    Sequeira V; Harper MT; Lilly CL; Bryington MS
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Jan; 32(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 35191128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. In vitro accuracy of digital and conventional impressions in the partially edentulous maxilla.
    Waldecker M; Rues S; Awounvo Awounvo JS; Rammelsberg P; Bömicke W
    Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Nov; 26(11):6491-6502. PubMed ID: 35778534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.