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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16091710)

  • 1. [Influence of the type of impression material, impression tray and making impression technology on the dimensional accuracy and depth of impression material penetration into "gingival sulcus". In vitro study].
    Riakhovskiĭ AN; Muradov MA
    Stomatologiia (Mosk); 2005; 84(4):57-64. PubMed ID: 16091710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [A new method of imprint receiving for non-removable dentures].
    Riakhovskiĭ AN; Muradov MA
    Stomatologiia (Mosk); 2006; 85(1):50-6. PubMed ID: 16482029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Sulcus reproduction with elastomeric impression materials: a new in vitro testing method.
    Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Takahashi H; Komatsu M
    Dent Mater; 2008 Dec; 24(12):1655-60. PubMed ID: 18499246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Dimensional accuracy of 2-stage putty-wash impressions: influence of impression trays and viscosity.
    Balkenhol M; Ferger P; Wöstmann B
    Int J Prosthodont; 2007; 20(6):573-5. PubMed ID: 18069363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy of complete dental arch impressions and stone casts using a three-dimensional measurement system. Effects on accuracy of rubber impression materials and trays.
    Ishida K
    Dent Jpn (Tokyo); 1990; 27(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 2099294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 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. Sulcus depth reproduction with polyvinyl siloxane impression material: effects of hydrophilicity and impression temperature.
    Takahashi H; Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Furukawa M; Komatsu M
    Quintessence Int; 2010 Mar; 41(3):e43-50. PubMed ID: 20213014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Implant cast accuracy as a function of impression techniques and impression material viscosity.
    Walker MP; Ries D; Borello B
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):669-74. PubMed ID: 18807563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ; Hertrampf K
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Accuracy of 2 impression techniques for ITI implants.
    Akça K; Cehreli MC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(4):517-23. PubMed ID: 15346748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Soft tissue transfer models: the patient-dentist-laboratory connection.
    Saba S
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1998 Sep; 64(8):584-5. PubMed ID: 9785689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Effects of different tray types on the resulting impression].
    Biffar R; Bittner B
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Aug; 44(8):624-7. PubMed ID: 2700730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. New theoretical model to measure pressure produced during impression procedure for complete dentures-Visual inspection of impression material flow.
    Nishigawa G; Maruo Y; Irie M; Oka M; Tamada Y; Minagi S
    Dent Mater; 2013 May; 29(5):530-4. PubMed ID: 23477950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.