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

331 related items for PubMed ID: 32928518

  • 1. Marginal and internal adaptation of single crowns and fixed dental prostheses by using digital and conventional workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Hasanzade M, Aminikhah M, Afrashtehfar KI, Alikhasi M.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Sep; 126(3):360-368. PubMed ID: 32928518
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. In Vivo and In Vitro Comparison of Internal and Marginal Fit of Digital and Conventional Impressions for Full-Coverage Fixed Restorations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
    Hasanzade M, Shirani M, Afrashtehfar KI, Naseri P, Alikhasi M.
    J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2019 Sep; 19(3):236-254. PubMed ID: 31732100
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Digital versus conventional workflow for the fabrication of multiunit fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vertical marginal fit in controlled in vitro studies.
    Lo Russo L, Caradonna G, Biancardino M, De Lillo A, Troiano G, Guida L.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Nov; 122(5):435-440. PubMed ID: 31027957
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Marginal adaptation of zirconia complete-coverage fixed dental restorations made from digital scans or conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Tabesh M, Nejatidanesh F, Savabi G, Davoudi A, Savabi O, Mirmohammadi H.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Apr; 125(4):603-610. PubMed ID: 32284188
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Accuracy of single-unit ceramic crown fabrication after digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Manisha J, Srivastava G, Das SS, Tabarak N, Choudhury GK.
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2023 Apr; 23(2):105-111. PubMed ID: 37102534
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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]

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

  • 8. 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]

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

  • 10. The impact of digitization and conventional techniques on the fit of fixed partial dentures FPDs: systematic review and Meta-analysis.
    Saeed EAM, Alaghbari SS, Lin N.
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Dec 04; 23(1):965. PubMed ID: 38049754
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Chochlidakis KM, Papaspyridakos P, Geminiani A, Chen CJ, Feng IJ, Ercoli C.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Aug 04; 116(2):184-190.e12. PubMed ID: 26946916
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Fit of zirconia fixed partial dentures fabricated from conventional impressions and digital scans: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Morsy N, El Kateb M, Azer A, Fathalla S.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Jul 04; 130(1):28-34. PubMed ID: 34696907
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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 04; 114(4):554-9. PubMed ID: 26100929
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Marginal gap of monolithic zirconia endocrowns fabricated by using digital scanning and conventional impressions.
    Falahchai M, Babaee Hemmati Y, Neshandar Asli H, Emadi I.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Feb 04; 125(2):325.e1-325.e5. PubMed ID: 33190865
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Marginal Accuracy of Lithium Disilicate Full-Coverage Single Crowns Made by Direct and Indirect Digital or Conventional Workflows: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Tabesh M, Nejatidanesh F, Savabi G, Davoudi A, Savabi O.
    J Prosthodont; 2022 Dec 04; 31(9):744-753. PubMed ID: 35344238
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 19. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part II: CAD-CAM versus conventional laboratory procedures.
    Sailer I, Benic GI, Fehmer V, Hämmerle CHF, Mühlemann S.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Jul 04; 118(1):43-48. PubMed ID: 28024819
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow.
    Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Sep 04; 17(7):1759-64. PubMed ID: 23086333
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 17.