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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16178282)

  • 1. Trends in indirect dentistry: 5. Impression materials and techniques.
    Stewardson DA
    Dent Update; 2005 Sep; 32(7):374-6, 379-80, 382-4 passim. PubMed ID: 16178282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A review of contemporary impression materials and techniques.
    Donovan TE; Chee WW
    Dent Clin North Am; 2004 Apr; 48(2):vi-vii, 445-70. PubMed ID: 15172610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Predictable definitive impressions for multiple indirect restorations using a modified putty and wash impression procedure.
    Leong EW; Cheng AC; Khin NT; Lee H; Leong DJ
    Singapore Dent J; 2007 Dec; 29(1):46-9. PubMed ID: 18472530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Universal paradigms for predictable final impressions.
    Vakay RT; Kois JC
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2005 Mar; 26(3):199-200, 202-6; quiz 208-9. PubMed ID: 15813574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of implant impressions with different impression coping types and shapes.
    Rashidan N; Alikhasi M; Samadizadeh S; Beyabanaki E; Kharazifard MJ
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Apr; 14(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 19804420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. First impressions count.
    Turner JW; Moazzez R; Banerjee A
    Dent Update; 2012 Sep; 39(7):455-8, 460-2, 465-6 passim. PubMed ID: 23094567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Intraoral Digital Impressioning for Dental Implant Restorations Versus Traditional Implant Impression Techniques.
    Wilk BL
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2015; 36(7):529-30, 532-3. PubMed ID: 26247446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric impression materials.
    Chen SY; Liang WM; Chen FN
    J Dent; 2004 Nov; 32(8):603-9. PubMed ID: 15476954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Identification and correction of common impression concerns: protocol and considerations.
    Kurtzman GM; Strassler HE
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2004 Jun; 16(5):377-82; quiz 384. PubMed ID: 15344586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital evaluation of the accuracy of impression techniques and materials in angulated implants.
    Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S; Ozan O; Ozcelik TB; Yagiz A
    J Dent; 2014 Dec; 42(12):1551-9. PubMed ID: 25446736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Impression trifecta: three tools and tips for better impressions.
    Gottlieb M; Fagin M
    Todays FDA; 2011; 23(3):57-61. PubMed ID: 21568211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Impression techniques: clinical properties that matter.
    Nash RW
    Dent Today; 2014 Apr; 33(4):110, 112-3. PubMed ID: 24791295
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A preliminary survey of impression trays used in the fabrication of fixed indirect restorations.
    Mitchell ST; Ramp MH; Ramp LC; Liu PR
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Oct; 18(7):582-8. PubMed ID: 19523024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Bond strength of three nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials to a light-activated resin tray.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    Int J Prosthodont; 1992; 5(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 1520444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations.
    Al-Abdullah K; Zandparsa R; Finkelman M; Hirayama H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Aug; 110(2):90-100. PubMed ID: 23929370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Impressions in implant dentistry.
    Bhakta S; Vere J; Calder I; Patel R
    Br Dent J; 2011 Oct; 211(8):361-7. PubMed ID: 22015512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How good are our impressions? An audit of alginate impression quality in the production of removable prostheses.
    Horwitz R
    Dent Update; 2014 May; 41(4):366-7, 369. PubMed ID: 24930259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Are we abusing our alginate impressions? An audit.
    Patel D; Perryer DG; Walmsley AD
    Dent Update; 2007 Dec; 34(10):650-3. PubMed ID: 18196831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.