146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20213014)
1. Sulcus depth reproduction with polyvinyl siloxane impression material: effects of hydrophilicity and impression temperature.
Takahashi H; Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Furukawa M; Komatsu M
Quintessence Int; 2010 Mar; 41(3):e43-50. PubMed ID: 20213014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Sulcus reproduction with elastomeric impression materials: a new in vitro testing method.
Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Takahashi H; Komatsu M
Dent Mater; 2008 Dec; 24(12):1655-60. PubMed ID: 18499246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Margin adaptation of indirect composite inlays fabricated on flexible dies.
Price RB; Gerrow JD
J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):306-13. PubMed ID: 10709039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane impression material reproducing the sulcular area.
Levartovsky S; Levy G; Brosh T; Harel N; Ganor Y; Pilo R
Dent Mater J; 2013; 32(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 23370867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of the space for wash materials on sulcus depth reproduction with addition-curing silicone using two-step putty-wash technique.
Shiozawa M; Takahashi H; Finger WJ; Iwasaki N
Dent Mater J; 2013; 32(1):150-5. PubMed ID: 23370884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dentin surface reproduction with hydrophilic and hydrophobic impression materials.
Takahashi H; Finger WJ
Dent Mater; 1991 Jul; 7(3):197-201. PubMed ID: 1813343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents.
Nowakowska D; Raszewski Z; Saczko J; Kulbacka J; Więckiewicz W
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):168-75. PubMed ID: 24461950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A modified shark-fin test simulating the single-step/double-mix technique: A comparison of three groups of elastomers.
Huettig F; Chekhani U; Klink A; Said F; Rupp F
Dent Mater J; 2018 Jun; 37(3):414-421. PubMed ID: 29491198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of marginal thickness on the distortion of different impression materials.
Laufer BZ; Baharav H; Ganor Y; Cardash HS
J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Nov; 76(5):466-71. PubMed ID: 8933434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of the setting stage on the accuracy of double-mix impressions made with addition-curing silicone.
Takahashi H; Finger WJ
J Prosthet Dent; 1994 Jul; 72(1):78-84. PubMed ID: 8083842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effect of temperature changes on the dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane and polyether impression materials.
Corso M; Abanomy A; Di Canzio J; Zurakowski D; Morgano SM
J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Jun; 79(6):626-31. PubMed ID: 9627890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of one-step vs. two-step impression techniques on long-term accuracy and dimensional stability when the finish line is within the gingival sulcular area.
Levartovsky S; Zalis M; Pilo R; Harel N; Ganor Y; Brosh T
J Prosthodont; 2014 Feb; 23(2):124-33. PubMed ID: 23734561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Linear dimensional accuracy of a polyvinyl siloxane of varying viscosities using different impression techniques.
Mishra S; Chowdhary R
J Investig Clin Dent; 2010 Aug; 1(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 25427185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under different conditions.
Katyayan PA; Kalavathy N; Katyayan M
Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):881-2. PubMed ID: 22484900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical efficacy of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials using the one-step two-viscosity impression technique.
Dogan S; Schwedhelm ER; Heindl H; Mancl L; Raigrodski AJ
J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Aug; 114(2):217-22. PubMed ID: 25976708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Hydrophilicity of unset and set elastomeric impression materials.
Rupp F; Geis-Gerstorfer J
Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(6):552-4. PubMed ID: 21209992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Dimensional accuracy of a new polyether impression material.
Endo T; Finger WJ
Quintessence Int; 2006 Jan; 37(1):47-51. PubMed ID: 16429703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Hydrophilic poly(vinyl siloxane) impression materials: dimensional accuracy, wettability, and effect on gypsum hardness.
Panichuttra R; Jones RM; Goodacre C; Munoz CA; Moore BK
Int J Prosthodont; 1991; 4(3):240-8. PubMed ID: 1810315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
