1 |
Shenoy VK. Single tooth implants: Pretreatment considerations and pretreatment evaluation. J Interdiscip Dent 2012;2:149-57.
DOI
|
2 |
Misch CE. Dental implant prosthetics. 2nd ed. St. Louis; Elsevier; 2015.
|
3 |
Kim Y, Oh TJ, Misch CE, Wang HL. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16: 26-35.
DOI
|
4 |
Andriessen FS, Rijkens DR, van der Meer WJ, Wismeijer DW. Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111:186-94.
DOI
|
5 |
Buzayan MM, Yunus NB. Passive fit in screw retained multi-unit implant prosthesis understanding and achieving: a review of the literature. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2014;14:16-23.
DOI
|
6 |
Basaki K, Alkumru H, De Souza G, Finer Y. Accuracy of digital vs conventional implant impression approach: a three-dimensional comparative in vitro analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017;32:792 -9.
DOI
|
7 |
Alikhasi M, Alsharbaty MHM, Moharrami M. Digital implant impression technique accuracy: a systematic review. Implant Dent 2017;26:929-35.
DOI
|
8 |
Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen CJ, Hanssen S, Naert I, Vandenberghe B. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:465-72.
|
9 |
Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:111-5.
DOI
|
10 |
Gallardo YR, Bohner L, Tortamano P, Pigozzo MN, Lagana DC, Sesma N. Patient outcomes and procedure working time for digital versus conventional impressions: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:214-9.
DOI
|
11 |
Alikhasi M, Siadat H, Nasirpour A, Hasanzade M. Three-dimensional accuracy of digital impression versus conventional method: effect of implant angulation and connection type. Int Dent J 2018;3761750.
|
12 |
Ajioka H, Kihara H, Odaira C, Kobayashi T, Kondo H. Examination of the position accuracy of implant abutments reproduced by intra-oral optical impression. PLoS One 2016:11:e0164048.
DOI
|
13 |
Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health 2014;14:10.
DOI
|
14 |
Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wostmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1759-64.
DOI
|
15 |
Amin S, Weber HP, Finkelman M, El Rafie K, Kudara Y, Papaspyridakos P. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28:1360-7.
DOI
|
16 |
Cappare P, Sannino G, Minoli M, Montemezzi P, Ferrini F. Conventional versus digital impressions for full arch screw-retained maxillary rehabilitations: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16:829.
DOI
|
17 |
Eliasson A, Ortorp A. The accuracy of an implant impression technique using digitally coded healing abutments. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:e30-8.
DOI
|
18 |
Fukazawa S, Odaira C, Kondo H. Investigation of accuracy and reproducibility of abutment position by intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res 2017;61:450-9.
DOI
|
19 |
Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 2017;17:92.
DOI
|
20 |
Vandeweghe S, Vervack V, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017; 28:648-53.
DOI
|
21 |
Howell KJ, McGlumphy EA, Drago C, Knapik G. Comparison of the accuracy of Biomet 3i Encode Robocast Technology and conventional implant impression techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:228-40.
DOI
|
22 |
Huang R, Liu Y, Huang B, Zhang C, Chen Z, Li Z. Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies: an in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation. Clin Oral Implants Res 2020;31:625-33.
DOI
|
23 |
Michelinakis G, Apostolakis D, Tsagarakis A, Kourakis G, Pavlakis E. A comparison of accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: a single-blinded in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:581-8.
DOI
|
24 |
Tahmaseb A, Wu V, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Evans C. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:416-35.
|
25 |
Motel C, Kirchner E, Adler W, Wichmann M, Matta RE. Impact of different scan bodies and scan strategies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions assessed with an intraoral scanner: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont 2020;29:309-14.
DOI
|
26 |
Arakida T, Kanazawa M, Iwaki M, Suzuki T, Minakuchi S. Evaluating the influence of ambient light on scanning trueness, precision, and time of intra oral scanner. J Prosthodont Res 2018;62:324-9.
DOI
|
27 |
Abduo J, Elseyoufi M. Accuracy of intraoral scanners: a systematic review of influencing factors. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2018;26:101-21.
|
28 |
Jivanescu A, Rotar P, Hategan S, Pricop C, Rus R, Goguta L. Clinical factors influence the trueness of intra-oral scanning. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2019;27:51-5.
|
29 |
Keeling A, Wu J, Ferrari M. Confounding factors affecting the marginal quality of an intra-oral scan. J Dent 2017;59:33-40.
DOI
|
30 |
Mangano FG, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Imburgia M, Mangano C, Admakin O. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 2019;19:101.
DOI
|
31 |
Braian M, Wennerberg A. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners for scanning edentulous and dentate complete-arch mandibular casts: a comparative in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2019;122:129-136.e2.
DOI
|
32 |
Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions-an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 2011;14:11-21.
|
33 |
Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int 2015;46:9-17.
|
34 |
Flugge T, van der Meer WJ, Gonzalez BG, Vach K, Wismeijer D, Wang P. The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant-supported dental prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:374-92.
|
35 |
O'Toole S, Osnes C, Bartlett D, Keeling A. Investigation into the accuracy and measurement methods of sequential 3D dental scan alignment. Dent Mater 2019;35:495-500.
DOI
|
36 |
Waldecker M, Rues S, Rammelsberg P, Bomicke W. Accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scans based on confocal microscopy versus optical triangulation: a comparative in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2020:S0022-3913(20)30298-5.
|
37 |
Ashraf Y, Sabet A, Hamdy A, Ebeid K. Influence of preparation type and tooth geometry on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont 2020;29:800-4.
DOI
|
38 |
Park JM, Kim RJ, Lee KW. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:113-20.
DOI
|
39 |
Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:121-8.
DOI
|
40 |
Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:36-42.
DOI
|
41 |
Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L, Viguie G, Viennot S, Robinson P, Farges JC, Fages M, Ducret M. Intraoral scanner technologies: A review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng 2017;2017:8427595.
|
42 |
Amornvit P, Rokaya D, Peampring C, Sanohkan S. Confocal 3D optical intraoral scanners and comparison of image capturing accuracy. Comput Mater Contin 2021;66:303-14.
|
43 |
van der Meer WJ, Andriessen FS, Wismeijer D, Ren Y. Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology. PLoS One 2012;7:e43312.
DOI
|