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
1534 related items for PubMed ID: 26070435
1. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Mar; 20(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 26070435 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. Su TS, Sun J. J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):362-7. PubMed ID: 27061628 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit zirconia frameworks fabricated with CAD-CAM technology using direct and indirect digital scans. Arezoobakhsh A, Shayegh SS, Jamali Ghomi A, Hakimaneh SMR. J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Jan; 123(1):105-112. PubMed ID: 30982618 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Berrendero S, Salido MP, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Pradíes G. Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Dec; 20(9):2403-2410. PubMed ID: 26800669 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Zarauz C, Valverde A, Martinez-Rus F, Hassan B, Pradies G. Clin Oral Investig; 2016 May; 20(4):799-806. PubMed ID: 26362778 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions. Ueda K, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Erdelt K, Keul C, Güth JF. Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Mar; 20(2):283-9. PubMed ID: 26121970 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of the Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns made from Conventional, Digital, or Conventional/Digital Techniques. Al Hamad KQ, Al Rashdan BA, Al Omari WM, Baba NZ. J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e580-e586. PubMed ID: 30091168 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Oct; 114(4):554-9. PubMed ID: 26100929 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, Qian F. J Prosthodont; 2014 Dec; 23(8):610-7. PubMed ID: 24995593 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J. J Dent; 2010 Jul; 38(7):553-9. PubMed ID: 20381576 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro. Schaefer O, Decker M, Wittstock F, Kuepper H, Guentsch A. J Dent; 2014 Jun; 42(6):677-83. PubMed ID: 24508541 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. An In Vitro Comparison of the Marginal Adaptation Accuracy of CAD/CAM Restorations Using Different Impression Systems. Shembesh M, Ali A, Finkelman M, Weber HP, Zandparsa R. J Prosthodont; 2017 Oct; 26(7):581-586. PubMed ID: 26855068 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of the fit of zirconia copings fabricated by direct and indirect digital scanning procedures. Lee B, Oh KC, Haam D, Lee JH, Moon HS. J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Aug; 120(2):225-231. PubMed ID: 29428522 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM-fabricated composite resin and ceramic crowns scanned by 2 intraoral cameras. de Paula Silveira AC, Chaves SB, Hilgert LA, Ribeiro AP. J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Mar; 117(3):386-392. PubMed ID: 27677214 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Marginal and internal fit of pressed ceramic crowns made from conventional and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing wax patterns: An in vitro comparison. Shamseddine L, Mortada R, Rifai K, Chidiac JJ. J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Aug; 116(2):242-8. PubMed ID: 26948080 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Rödiger M, Heinitz A, Bürgers R, Rinke S. Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Mar; 21(2):579-587. PubMed ID: 27469102 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Three-Dimensional Digital Evaluation of the Fit of Endocrowns Fabricated from Different CAD/CAM Materials. Zimmermann M, Valcanaia A, Neiva G, Mehl A, Fasbinder D. J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e504-e509. PubMed ID: 29508488 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of Different CAM Strategies on the Fit of Partial Crown Restorations: A Digital Three-dimensional Evaluation. Zimmermann M, Valcanaia A, Neiva G, Mehl A, Fasbinder D. Oper Dent; 2018 Feb; 43(5):530-538. PubMed ID: 29630483 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Marginal adaptation of zirconium dioxide copings: influence of the CAD/CAM system and the finish line design. Euán R, Figueras-Álvarez O, Cabratosa-Termes J, Oliver-Parra R. J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):155-62. PubMed ID: 24445027 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical marginal and internal adaptation of CAD/CAM milling, laser sintering, and cast metal ceramic crowns. Tamac E, Toksavul S, Toman M. J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Oct; 112(4):909-13. PubMed ID: 24819532 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]