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 *

454 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18269123)

  • 1. Working time of elastomeric impression materials: relevance of rheological tests.
    Balkenhol M; Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Wöstmann B
    Am J Dent; 2007 Dec; 20(6):347-52. PubMed ID: 18269123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Working times of elastomeric impression materials determined by dimensional accuracy.
    Tan E; Chai J; Wozniak WT
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(2):188-96. PubMed ID: 8639243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Working times of elastomeric impression materials according to dimensional stability and detail reproduction.
    Tan E; Chai J
    Int J Prosthodont; 1995; 8(6):541-7. PubMed ID: 8595114
    [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. Shark fin test and impression quality: a correlation analysis.
    Balkenhol M; Wöstmann B; Kanehira M; Finger WJ
    J Dent; 2007 May; 35(5):409-15. PubMed ID: 17254690
    [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. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations.
    Ragain JC; Grosko ML; Raj M; Ryan TN; Johnston WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 11203635
    [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. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Volatilization of components from and water absorption of polyether impressions.
    Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Endo T
    J Dent; 2006 Feb; 34(2):134-8. PubMed ID: 16150526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials.
    Wadhwani CP; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Raigrodski AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Jun; 93(6):530-9. PubMed ID: 15942613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of the precision of three implant transfer impression techniques using two elastomeric impression materials.
    Mostafa TM; Elgendy MN; Kashef NA; Halim MM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(6):525-8. PubMed ID: 21209987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Tear strength of five elastomeric impression materials at two setting times and two tearing rates.
    Lawson NC; Burgess JO; Litaker M
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2008; 20(3):186-93. PubMed ID: 18533981
    [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. 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]  

  • 20. A laboratory investigation of the accuracy of two impression techniques for single-tooth implants.
    Daoudi MF; Setchell DJ; Searson LJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(2):152-8. PubMed ID: 11843452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.