Request a copy

Full Text

43

CITATIONS

43 Total citations

20 Recent citations

14 Field Citation Ratio

4.25 Relative Citation Ratio

publications

0

supporting

0

mentioning

0

contrasting

0

Smart Citations

0

0

0

0

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

• Almeida e Silva, J. S., Erdelt, K., Edelhoff, D., Araújo, É., Stimmelmayr, M., Vieira, L. C. C., & Güth, J.-F. (2014). Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clinical Oral Investigations, 18(2), 515–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0987-2
• Atieh, M. A., Ritter, A. V., Ko, C. C., & Duqum, I. (2017). Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 118(3), 400–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.022
• Belser, U. C., Grutter, L., Vailati, F., Bornstein, M. M., Weber, H. P., & Buser, D. (2009). Outcome evaluation of early placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implants using objective esthetic criteria: A cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 patients with a 2- to 4-year follow-up using pink and white esthetic scores. Journal of Periodontology, 80(1), 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080435
• Benic, G. I., Muhlemann, S., Fehmer, V., Hammerle, C. H., & Sailer, I. (2016). Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part I: Digital versus conventional unilateral impressions. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 116(5), 777–782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.05.007
• Boeddinghaus, M., Breloer, E. S., Rehmann, P., & Wostmann, B. (2015). Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clinical Oral Investigations, 19(8), 2027–2034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1430-7
• Ender, A., Attin, T., & Mehl, A. (2016). In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 115(3), 313–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.011
• Ender, A., & Mehl, A. (2011). Full arch scans: Conventional versus digital impressions–an in-vitro study. International Journal of Computerized Dentistry, 14(1), 11–21.
• Ender, A., & Mehl, A. (2013). Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. International Journal of Computerized Dentistry, 16(1), 11–21.
• Ender, A., Zimmermann, M., Attin, T., & Mehl, A. (2016). In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions. Clinical Oral Investigations, 20(7), 1495–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1641-y
• Fava, J., Lin, M., Zahran, M., & Jokstad, A. (2015). Single implant-supported crowns in the aesthetic zone: Patient satisfaction with aesthetic appearance compared with appraisals by laypeople and dentists. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(10), 1113–1120. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12412
• Freire, Y., Gonzalo, E., Lopez-Suarez, C., & Suarez, M. J. (2017). The marginal fit of CAD/CAM monolithic ceramic and metal-ceramic crowns. Journal of Prosthodontics, 28(3), 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12590
• Guth, J. F., Edelhoff, D., Schweiger, J., & Keul, C. (2015). A new method for the evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in vitro. Clinical Oral Investigations, 20(7), 1487–1494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1626-x
• Guth, J. F., Keul, C., Stimmelmayr, M., Beuer, F., & Edelhoff, D. (2013). Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clinical Oral Investigations, 17(4), 1201–1208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0795-0
• Hamza, T. A., & Sherif, R. M. (2017). In vitro evaluation of marginal discrepancy of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated with different CAD-CAM systems. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 117(6), 762–766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.011
• Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2014). Complete digital workflow for the production of implant-supported single-unit monolithic crowns. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 25(11), 1304–1306. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12270
• Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2015a). Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: A cost/time analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(12), 1430–1435. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12476
• Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2015b). Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: A randomized crossover trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 27(12), e185–e189. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12600
• Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2015c). Time-efficiency analysis comparing digital and conventional workflows for implant crowns: A prospective clinical crossover trial. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 30(5), 1047–1053. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3963
• Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2016b). Time-efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 27(11), 1401–1406. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12753
• Joda, T., Ferrari, M., & Bragger, U. (2017). Monolithic implant-supported lithium disilicate (LS2) crowns in a complete digital workflow: A prospective clinical trial with a 2-year follow-up. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 19(3), 505–511. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12472
• Joda, T., Ferrari, M., Gallucci, G. O., Wittneben, J. G., & Bragger, U. (2017). Digital technology in fixed implant prosthodontics. Periodontology 2000, 73(1), 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12164
• Joda, T., Katsoulis, J., & Bragger, U. (2016). Clinical fitting and adjustment time for implant-supported crowns comparing digital and conventional workflows. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 18(5), 946–954. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12377
• Joda, T., Zarone, F., & Ferrari, M. (2017). The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review. BMC Oral Health, 17(1), 124. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0415-0
• Kapos, T., Ashy, L. M., Gallucci, G. O., Weber, H. P., & Wismeijer, D. (2009). Computer-aided design and computer-assisted manufacturing in prosthetic implant dentistry. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 24(Suppl), 110–117.
• Kapos, T., & Evans, C. (2014). CAD/CAM technology for implant abutments, crowns, and superstructures. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 29(Suppl), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g2.3
• Keul, C., Stawarczyk, B., Erdelt, K. J., Beuer, F., Edelhoff, D., & Guth, J. F. (2014). Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization–a laboratory study. Dental Materials, 30(4), 400–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.01.006
• Koch, G. K., Gallucci, G. O., & Lee, S. J. (2016). Accuracy in the digital workflow: From data acquisition to the digitally milled cast. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 115(6), 749–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.004
• Lee, S. J., Betensky, R. A., Gianneschi, G. E., & Gallucci, G. O. (2015). Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(6), 715–719. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12375
• Lee, S. J., & Gallucci, G. O. (2013). Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: Efficiency outcomes. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 24(1), 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02430.x
• Moreira, A. H., Rodrigues, N. F., Pinho, A. C., Fonseca, J. C., & Vilaca, J. L. (2015). Accuracy comparison of implant impression techniques: A systematic review. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 17(Suppl 2), e751–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12310
• Ng, J., Ruse, D., & Wyatt, C. (2014). A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 112(3), 555–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.002
• Papaspyridakos, P., Gallucci, G. O., Chen, C. J., Hanssen, S., Naert, I., & Vandenberghe, B. (2015). Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: Accuracy outcomes. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 27(4), 465–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12567
• Sailer, I., Benic, G. I., Fehmer, V., Hammerle, C. H., & Muhlemann, S. (2016). 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. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 118(1), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.031
• Sakornwimon, N., & Leevailoj, C. (2017). Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 118(3), 386–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.019
• Schepke, U., Meijer, H. J., Kerdijk, W., & Cune, M. S. (2015). Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: Operating time and patient preference. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 114(3), 403–406.e401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.003
• Seelbach, P., Brueckel, C., & Wostmann, B. (2013). Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clinical Oral Investigations, 17(7), 1759–1764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4
• Sulaiman, T. A., Abdulmajeed, A. A., Donovan, T. E., Cooper, L. F., & Walter, R. (2016). Fracture rate of monolithic zirconia restorations up to 5 years: A dental laboratory survey. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 116(3), 436–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.033
• Syrek, A., Reich, G., Ranftl, D., Klein, C., Cerny, B., & Brodesser, J. (2010). Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. Journal of Dentistry, 38(7), 553–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.03.015
• Tettamanti, S., Millen, C., Gavric, J., Buser, D., Belser, U. C., Bragger, U., & Wittneben, J. G. (2016). Esthetic evaluation of implant crowns and peri-implant soft tissue in the anterior maxilla: Comparison and reproducibility of three different indices. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 18(3), 517–526. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12306
• van Noort, R. (2012). The future of dental devices is digital. Dental Materials, 28(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.10.014
• Wittneben, J. G., Gavric, J., Belser, U. C., Bornstein, M. M., Joda, T., Chappuis, V., … Bragger, U. (2017). Esthetic and clinical performance of implant-supported all-ceramic crowns made with prefabricated or CAD/CAM zirconia abutments. Journal of Dental Research, 96(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034516681767
• Worni, A., Katsoulis, J., Kolgeci, L., Worni, M., & Mericske-Stern, R. (2017). Monolithic zirconia reconstructions supported by teeth and implants: 1- to 3-year results of a case series. Quintessence International, 48(6), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a38138
• Zarauz, C., Valverde, A., Martinez-Rus, F., Hassan, B., & Pradies, G. (2016). Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Clinical Oral Investigations, 20(4), 799–806. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1590-5