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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

684 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12237795)

  • 1. Pressure generated on a simulated oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different designs.
    Masri R; Driscoll CF; Burkhardt J; Von Fraunhofer A; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 12237795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Pressure generated on a simulated mandibular oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different design.
    Al-Ahmad A; Masri R; Driscoll CF; von Fraunhofer J; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 16650009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical trial investigating success rates for polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impressions made with full-arch and dual-arch plastic trays.
    Johnson GH; Mancl LA; Schwedhelm ER; Verhoef DR; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 20105676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of different adhesives on vinyl polysiloxane bond strength to two tray materials.
    Peregrina A; Land MF; Wandling C; Johnston WM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Sep; 94(3):209-13. PubMed ID: 16126072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of selected variables on the retention of irreversible hydrocolloid impression material.
    Al-Athel MS
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):57-64. PubMed ID: 18784860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of relief space and escape holes on pressure characteristics of maxillary edentulous impressions.
    Komiyama O; Saeki H; Kawara M; Kobayashi K; Otake S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Jun; 91(6):570-6. PubMed ID: 15211300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effect of impression volume and double-arch trays on the registration of maximum intercuspation.
    Hahn SM; Millstein PL; Kinnunen TH; Wright RF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Dec; 102(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 19961994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study.
    Caputi S; Varvara G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Apr; 99(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 18395537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Modified fluid wax impression for a severely resorbed edentulous mandibular ridge.
    Tan KM; Singer MT; Masri R; Driscoll CF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Apr; 101(4):279-82. PubMed ID: 19328281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study.
    Lee H; Ercoli C; Funkenbusch PD; Feng C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):107-13. PubMed ID: 18262011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of custom tray material on the accuracy of master casts.
    Shafa S; Zaree Z; Mosharraf R
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):49-56. PubMed ID: 18784859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A retrospective comparison of two definitive impression techniques and their associated postinsertion adjustments in complete denture prosthodontics.
    Drago CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2003 Sep; 12(3):192-7. PubMed ID: 14508741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A clinical comparison of two vinyl polysiloxane impression materials using the one-step technique.
    Raigrodski AJ; Dogan S; Mancl LA; Heindl H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Sep; 102(3):179-86. PubMed ID: 19703625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of preference of mixing techniques and duration of mixing and tray loading for two viscosities of vinyl polysiloxane material.
    Nam J; Raigrodski AJ; Townsend J; Lepe X; Mancl LA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jan; 97(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 17280886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accuracy of casts generated from dual-arch impressions.
    Breeding LC; Dixon DL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Oct; 84(4):403-7. PubMed ID: 11044846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy of a reformulated fast-set vinyl polysiloxane impression material using dual-arch trays.
    Kang AH; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Wataha JC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 May; 101(5):332-41. PubMed ID: 19410067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material in removable prosthodontics. Part 1: edentulous impressions.
    Massad JJ; Cagna DR
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2007 Aug; 28(8):452-9; quiz 460, 470. PubMed ID: 18578103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of using custom or stock trays on the accuracy of gypsum casts.
    Rueda LJ; Sy-Muñoz JT; Naylor WP; Goodacre CJ; Swartz ML
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(4):367-73. PubMed ID: 8957875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 35.