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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

258 related items for PubMed ID: 23189292

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Accuracy of 3 different impression techniques for internal connection angulated implants.
    Tsagkalidis G, Tortopidis D, Mpikos P, Kaisarlis G, Koidis P.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Oct; 114(4):517-23. PubMed ID: 26213265
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Effect of implant angulation, connection length, and impression material on the dimensional accuracy of implant impressions: an in vitro comparative study.
    Sorrentino R, Gherlone EF, Calesini G, Zarone F.
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2010 May; 12 Suppl 1():e63-76. PubMed ID: 19438937
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Accuracy of implant impressions with different impression coping types and shapes.
    Rashidan N, Alikhasi M, Samadizadeh S, Beyabanaki E, Kharazifard MJ.
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Apr; 14(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 19804420
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study.
    Pujari M, Garg P, Prithviraj DR.
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials.
    De La Cruz JE, Funkenbusch PD, Ercoli C, Moss ME, Graser GN, Tallents RH.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 12426505
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. The Effect of Implant Angulation on the Transfer Accuracy of External-Connection Implants.
    Alikhasi M, Siadat H, Rahimian S.
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2015 Aug; 17(4):822-9. PubMed ID: 24299654
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Comparative evaluation of impression accuracy of tilted and straight implants in All-on-Four technique.
    Ehsani S, Siadat H, Alikhasi M.
    Implant Dent; 2014 Apr; 23(2):225-30. PubMed ID: 24614881
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ, Hertrampf K.
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008 Apr; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 13.