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.
749 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18717085)
61. A predictable and accurate technique with elastomeric impression materials. Barghi N; Ontiveros JC Am J Dent; 1999 Aug; 12(4):161-3. PubMed ID: 10649919 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. The influence of temperature on the dimensional stability of poly (vinyl siloxane) impression materials. Chew CL; Chee WW; Donovan TE Int J Prosthodont; 1993; 6(6):528-32. PubMed ID: 8148022 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Issues in handling impression materials. Giordano R Gen Dent; 2000; 48(6):646-8. PubMed ID: 12004656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. In vitro study on the dimensional accuracy of selected materials for monophase elastic impression making. Piwowarczyk A; Ottl P; Büchler A; Lauer HC; Hoffmann A Int J Prosthodont; 2002; 15(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 11951807 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. The effect of sulcular width on the linear accuracy of impression materials in the presence of an undercut. Baharav H; Kupershmidt I; Laufer BZ; Cardash HS Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(5):585-9. PubMed ID: 15543916 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. Accuracy of impression techniques for implants. Part 1--Influence of transfer copings surface abrasion. Assunção WG; Cardoso A; Gomes EA; Tabata LF; dos Santos PH J Prosthodont; 2008 Dec; 17(8):641-7. PubMed ID: 19090889 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. An evaluation of student and clinician perception of digital and conventional implant impressions. Lee SJ; Macarthur RX; Gallucci GO J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):420-3. PubMed ID: 23998623 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. In vitro study of transmission of bacteria from contaminated metal models to stone models via impressions. Sofou A; Larsen T; Owall B; Fiehn NE Clin Oral Investig; 2002 Sep; 6(3):166-70. PubMed ID: 12271350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Comparative analysis of dimensional precision of different silicone impression materials. Al-Zarea BK; Sughaireen MG J Contemp Dent Pract; 2011 May; 12(3):208-15. PubMed ID: 22186818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. An implant impression technique using a plaster splinting index combined with a silicone impression. Eid N J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Dec; 92(6):575-7. PubMed ID: 15583565 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Reproducibility of interocclusal recording for mandibular removable partial denture in bilateral distal extension cases. Togano H; Hideshima M; Ohyama T J Med Dent Sci; 2003 Mar; 50(1):53-61. PubMed ID: 12715920 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. A clinical report on the use of closed-tray, hex-lock-friction-fit implant impression copings. Raviv E; Hanna J; Raviv R; Harel-Raviv M J Oral Implantol; 2014 Aug; 40(4):449-53. PubMed ID: 25106009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Dimensional accuracy of an epoxy die material using different polymerization methods. Prisco R; Cozzolino G; Vigolo P J Prosthodont; 2009 Feb; 18(2):156-61. PubMed ID: 19054302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. Antimicrobial effect of 4 disinfectants on alginate, polyether, and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. Al-Jabrah O; Al-Shumailan Y; Al-Rashdan M Int J Prosthodont; 2007; 20(3):299-307. PubMed ID: 17580464 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. Effect of mixing technique on shrinkage rate of one polyether and two polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. Lampé I; Marton S; Hegedüs C Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(5):590. PubMed ID: 15543917 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]