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 *

262 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14564290)

  • 1. The effect of surface moisture on detail reproduction of elastomeric impressions.
    Johnson GH; Lepe X; Aw TC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Oct; 90(4):354-64. PubMed ID: 14564290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting.
    Berg JC; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Adán-Plaza S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):150-61. PubMed ID: 12886208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy of a new ring-opening metathesis elastomeric dental impression material with spray and immersion disinfection.
    Kronström MH; Johnson GH; Hompesch RW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 20105678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Moisture effect on polyether and polyvinylsiloxane dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction.
    Walker MP; Petrie CS; Haj-Ali R; Spencer P; Dumas C; Williams K
    J Prosthodont; 2005 Sep; 14(3):158-63. PubMed ID: 16336232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under dry, moist, and wet conditions.
    Petrie CS; Walker MP; O'mahony AM; Spencer P
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Oct; 90(4):365-72. PubMed ID: 14564291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pre- and post-set hydrophilicity of elastomeric impression materials.
    Michalakis KX; Bakopoulou A; Hirayama H; Garefis DP; Garefis PD
    J Prosthodont; 2007; 16(4):238-48. PubMed ID: 17559537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Flow profile of regular and fast-setting elastomeric impression materials using a shark fin testing device.
    Lawson NC; Cakir D; Ramp L; Burgess JO
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2011 Jun; 23(3):171-6. PubMed ID: 21649832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of mixing technique on surface characteristics of impression materials.
    Lepe X; Johnson GH; Berg JC; Aw TC
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 May; 79(5):495-502. PubMed ID: 9597600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Gingival sulcus simulation model for evaluating the penetration characteristics of elastomeric impression materials.
    Aimjirakul P; Masuda T; Takahashi H; Miura H
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(4):385-9. PubMed ID: 12956493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Wettability, imbibition, and mass change of disinfected low-viscosity impression materials.
    Lepe X; Johnson GH; Berg JC; Aw TC; Stroh GS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):268-76. PubMed ID: 12426496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An in vitro study on the dimensional stability of a vinyl polyether silicone impression material over a prolonged storage period.
    Nassar U; Oko A; Adeeb S; El-Rich M; Flores-Mir C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Mar; 109(3):172-8. PubMed ID: 23522366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Changes in properties of nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials after storage of components.
    Hondrum SO
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jan; 85(1):73-81. PubMed ID: 11174682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of the surface detail reproduction of flexible die material systems.
    Gerrow JD; Price RB
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct; 80(4):485-9. PubMed ID: 9791798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dimensional stability and detail reproduction of irreversible hydrocolloid and elastomeric impressions disinfected by immersion.
    Johnson GH; Chellis KD; Gordon GE; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Apr; 79(4):446-53. PubMed ID: 9576321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of prolonged setting time on permanent deformation of elastomeric impression materials.
    Balkenhol M; Haunschild S; Erbe C; Wöstmann B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 May; 103(5):288-94. PubMed ID: 20416412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The dynamic interaction of water with four dental impression materials during cure.
    Hosseinpour D; Berg JC
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Jun; 18(4):292-300. PubMed ID: 19210607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of the accuracy of polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, and plaster impressions for long-span implant-supported prostheses.
    Hoods-Moonsammy VJ; Owen P; Howes DG
    Int J Prosthodont; 2014; 27(5):433-8. PubMed ID: 25191885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Surface detail reproduction of elastomeric impression materials related to rheological properties.
    German MJ; Carrick TE; McCabe JF
    Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):951-6. PubMed ID: 18164051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.