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 *

757 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19054302)

  • 21. Study of the physical properties of type IV gypsum, resin-containing, and epoxy die materials.
    Duke P; Moore BK; Haug SP; Andres CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Apr; 83(4):466-73. PubMed ID: 10756298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Comparative evaluation of few physical properties of epoxy resin, resin-modified gypsum and conventional type IV gypsum die materials: an in vitro study.
    Gujjarlapudi MC; Reddy SV; Madineni PK; Ealla KK; Nunna VN; Manne SD
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jan; 13(1):48-54. PubMed ID: 22430693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of storage time on the accuracy and dimensional stability of reversible hydrocolloid impression material.
    Schleier PE; Gardner FM; Nelson SK; Pashley DH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):244-50. PubMed ID: 11552162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study.
    Pujari M; Garg P; Prithviraj DR
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of dimensional accuracy of four different die materials before and after disinfection of the impression: an in vitro study.
    Nandini Y; Vinitha KB; Manvi S; Smitha M
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jul; 14(4):668-74. PubMed ID: 24309347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Master cast accuracy in single-tooth implant replacement cases: an in vitro comparison. A technical note.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2005; 20(3):455-60. PubMed ID: 15973958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of the accuracy of 3 transfer techniques for implant-supported prostheses with multiple abutments.
    Naconecy MM; Teixeira ER; Shinkai RS; Frasca LC; Cervieri A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(2):192-8. PubMed ID: 15101589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Impression techniques and misfit-induced strains on implant-supported superstructures: an in vitro study.
    Cehreli MC; Akça K
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2006 Aug; 26(4):379-85. PubMed ID: 16939020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Accuracy of impression techniques for implants. Part 2 - comparison of splinting techniques.
    Filho HG; Mazaro JV; Vedovatto E; Assunção WG; dos Santos PH
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Feb; 18(2):172-6. PubMed ID: 19178624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Effect of different modes of light curing and resin composites on microleakage of Class II restorations.
    Hardan LS; Amm EW; Ghayad A
    Odontostomatol Trop; 2008 Dec; 31(124):27-34. PubMed ID: 19441264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Accuracy of implant impression splinted techniques: effect of splinting material.
    Assif D; Nissan J; Varsano I; Singer A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1999; 14(6):885-8. PubMed ID: 10612928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A clinical evaluation of the agar alginate combined impression: dimensional accuracy of dies by new master crown technique.
    Ratnaweera PM; Yoshida K; Miura H; Kohta A; Tsuchihira K
    J Med Dent Sci; 2003 Sep; 50(3):231-8. PubMed ID: 15074361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Accuracy of different impression techniques for internal-connection implants.
    Lee YJ; Heo SJ; Koak JY; Kim SK
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(5):823-30. PubMed ID: 19865622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Surface detail, compressive strength, and dimensional accuracy of gypsum casts after repeated immersion in hypochlorite solution.
    Abdullah MA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Jun; 95(6):462-8. PubMed ID: 16765160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 38.