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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38534043)

  • 1. In vitro comparison of accuracy between conventional and digital impression using elastomeric materials and two intra-oral scanning devices.
    Palantza E; Sykaras N; Zoidis P; Kourtis S
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 Aug; 36(8):1179-1198. PubMed ID: 38534043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study.
    Amin S; Weber HP; Finkelman M; El Rafie K; Kudara Y; Papaspyridakos P
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2017 Nov; 28(11):1360-1367. PubMed ID: 28039903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of different impression coping and scan body designs on the accuracy of conventional versus digital implant impressions: An in vitro study.
    Alkindi S; Hamdoon Z; Aziz AM
    J Dent; 2024 Jul; 146():105045. PubMed ID: 38714241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Conventional and digital complete arch implant impression techniques: An in vitro study comparing accuracy.
    Gómez-Polo M; Sallorenzo A; Cascos R; Ballesteros J; Barmak AB; Revilla-León M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Oct; 132(4):809-818. PubMed ID: 36539313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of the accuracy between conventional and various digital implant impressions for an implant-supported mandibular complete arch-fixed prosthesis: An in vitro study.
    Kosago P; Ungurawasaporn C; Kukiattrakoon B
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Aug; 32(7):616-624. PubMed ID: 36083233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Accuracy of conventional impressions and digital scans for implant-supported fixed prostheses in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism: An in vitro study.
    El Osta N; Drancourt N; Auduc C; Veyrune JL; Nicolas E
    J Dent; 2024 Apr; 143():104892. PubMed ID: 38367825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 3D Accuracy of a Conventional Method Versus Three Digital Scanning Strategies for Completely Edentulous Maxillary Implant Impressions.
    Blanco-Plard A; Hernandez A; Pino F; Vargas N; Rivas-Tumanyan S; Elias A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2023 Dec; 38(6):1211-1219. PubMed ID: 38085753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Trueness and precision of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner with different head size in the partially edentulous mandible.
    Hayama H; Fueki K; Wadachi J; Wakabayashi N
    J Prosthodont Res; 2018 Jul; 62(3):347-352. PubMed ID: 29502933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Accuracy of impression-making methods in edentulous arches: An in vitro study encompassing conventional and digital methods.
    Li J; Moon HS; Kim JH; Yoon HI; Oh KC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):479-486. PubMed ID: 33583617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro.
    Ender A; Zimmermann M; Mehl A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 30848250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques.
    Alsharbaty MHM; Alikhasi M; Zarrati S; Shamshiri AR
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Apr; 28(4):e902-e908. PubMed ID: 29423969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Conventional open-tray impression versus intraoral digital scan for implant-level complete-arch impression.
    Kim KR; Seo KY; Kim S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Dec; 122(6):543-549. PubMed ID: 30955939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.