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 *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20213014)

  • 21. Clinical significance of surface activation of silicone impression materials.
    Boening KW; Walter MH; Schuette U
    J Dent; 1998; 26(5-6):447-52. PubMed ID: 9699436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting.
    Berg JC; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Adán-Plaza S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):150-61. PubMed ID: 12886208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Casting ability of selected impression materials tested in different conditions in an in vitro sulcus model.
    Kolbeck C; Rosentritt M; Lang R; Schiller M; Handel G
    Quintessence Int; 2009 Oct; 40(9):e62-8. PubMed ID: 19862391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Application times for the single-step/double-mix technique for impression materials in clinical practice.
    Rupp F; Saker O; Axmann D; Geis-Gerstorfer J; Engel E
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(6):562-5. PubMed ID: 22146256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Influence of tray rigidity and impression technique on accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
    Hoyos A; Soderholm KJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 21210004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Defects in automixed addition silicone elastomers prepared by putty-wash impression technique.
    Soh G; Chong YH
    J Oral Rehabil; 1991 Nov; 18(6):547-53. PubMed ID: 1762027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Reproducibility of sterilized rubber impressions.
    Abdelaziz KM; Hassan AM; Hodges JS
    Braz Dent J; 2004; 15(3):209-13. PubMed ID: 15798825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The influence of implant placement depth and impression material on the stability of an open tray impression coping.
    Linkevicius T; Svediene O; Vindasiute E; Puisys A; Linkeviciene L
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Oct; 108(4):238-43. PubMed ID: 23031730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Contact angles of contemporary type 3 impression materials.
    Balkenhol M; Eichhorn M; Wostmann B
    Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(4):396-8. PubMed ID: 19639079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of defects in surface detail for monophase, 2-phase, and 3-phase impression techniques: an in vitro study.
    Varvara G; Murmura G; Sinjari B; Cardelli P; Caputi S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Feb; 113(2):108-13. PubMed ID: 25438741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Surface detail reproduction with new elastomeric dental impression materials.
    Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Komatsu M
    Quintessence Int; 2007 Jun; 38(6):479-88. PubMed ID: 17625631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Dental impression materials.
    Perry R
    J Vet Dent; 2013; 30(2):116-24. PubMed ID: 24006720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effect of polyvinyl siloxane impression material on the polymerization of composite resin.
    Chen L; Kleverlaan CJ; Liang K; Yang D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Apr; 117(4):552-558. PubMed ID: 27765393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of surface moisture on detail reproduction of elastomeric impressions.
    Johnson GH; Lepe X; Aw TC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Oct; 90(4):354-64. PubMed ID: 14564290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 3D evaluation of the effect of disinfectants on dimensional accuracy and stability of two elastomeric impression materials.
    Soganci G; Cinar D; Caglar A; Yagiz A
    Dent Mater J; 2018 Jul; 37(4):675-684. PubMed ID: 29848853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.