439 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19033027)
1. Retention strength of impression materials to a tray material using different adhesive methods: an in vitro study.
Marafie Y; Looney S; Nelson S; Chan D; Browning W; Rueggeberg F
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Dec; 100(6):432-40. PubMed ID: 19033027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of different adhesives on vinyl polysiloxane bond strength to two tray materials.
Peregrina A; Land MF; Wandling C; Johnston WM
J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Sep; 94(3):209-13. PubMed ID: 16126072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The effect of selected variables on the retention of irreversible hydrocolloid impression material.
Al-Athel MS
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):57-64. PubMed ID: 18784860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. The effect of custom tray material type and adhesive drying time on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system.
Dixon DL; Breeding LC; Brown JS
Int J Prosthodont; 1994; 7(2):129-33. PubMed ID: 8003192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effect of custom tray material type and surface treatment on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system.
Dixon DL; Breeding LC; Bosser MJ; Nafso AJ
Int J Prosthodont; 1993; 6(3):303-6. PubMed ID: 8397701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Peel bond strengths of five impression material tray adhesives.
MacSween R; Price RB
J Can Dent Assoc; 1991 Aug; 57(8):654-7. PubMed ID: 1889016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of casts generated from dual-arch impressions.
Breeding LC; Dixon DL
J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Oct; 84(4):403-7. PubMed ID: 11044846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Factors that affect the adhesion of two irreversible hydrocolloid materials to two custom tray materials.
Smith SJ; McCord JF; Macfarlane TV
J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Oct; 88(4):423-30. PubMed ID: 12447220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Pressure generated on a simulated mandibular oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different design.
Al-Ahmad A; Masri R; Driscoll CF; von Fraunhofer J; Romberg E
J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 16650009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Efficacy of tray adhesives for the adhesion of elastomer rubber impression materials to impression modeling plastics for border molding.
Nishigawa G; Sato T; Suenaga K; Minagi S
J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Feb; 79(2):140-4. PubMed ID: 9513098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pressure generated on a simulated oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different designs.
Masri R; Driscoll CF; Burkhardt J; Von Fraunhofer A; Romberg E
J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 12237795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy of a reformulated fast-set vinyl polysiloxane impression material using dual-arch trays.
Kang AH; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Wataha JC
J Prosthet Dent; 2009 May; 101(5):332-41. PubMed ID: 19410067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Assessment of preference of mixing techniques and duration of mixing and tray loading for two viscosities of vinyl polysiloxane material.
Nam J; Raigrodski AJ; Townsend J; Lepe X; Mancl LA
J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jan; 97(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 17280886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Correlation of impression removal force with elastomeric impression material rigidity and hardness.
Walker MP; Alderman N; Petrie CS; Melander J; McGuire J
J Prosthodont; 2013 Jul; 22(5):362-6. PubMed ID: 23387301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
