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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2083026)

  • 21. The effect of using custom or stock trays on the accuracy of gypsum casts.
    Rueda LJ; Sy-Muñoz JT; Naylor WP; Goodacre CJ; Swartz ML
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(4):367-73. PubMed ID: 8957875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A laboratory investigation of the accuracy of two impression techniques for single-tooth implants.
    Daoudi MF; Setchell DJ; Searson LJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(2):152-8. PubMed ID: 11843452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations.
    Ragain JC; Grosko ML; Raj M; Ryan TN; Johnston WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 11203635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Working times of elastomeric impression materials according to dimensional stability and detail reproduction.
    Tan E; Chai J
    Int J Prosthodont; 1995; 8(6):541-7. PubMed ID: 8595114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays.
    Cayouette MJ; Burgess JO; Jones RE; Yuan CH
    Quintessence Int; 2003 Mar; 34(3):189-98. PubMed ID: 12731600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Compatibility of a new epoxy resin with impression materials.
    Schelb E; Baracat SA; Almaguer R
    Am J Dent; 1990 Aug; 3(4):171-4. PubMed ID: 2076244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. The linear accuracy of impressions and stone dies as affected by the thickness of the impression margin.
    Laufer BZ; Baharav H; Cardash HS
    Int J Prosthodont; 1994; 7(3):247-52. PubMed ID: 7916890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Ability of various impression materials to produce duplicate dies from successive impressions.
    Morgano SM; Milot P; Ducharme P; Rose L
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Apr; 73(4):333-40. PubMed ID: 7783010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [The study on surface porosity of die stone. Influence of vinyl polysiloxane impression materials].
    Okuda N; Ueno S; Kawada E; Nakanishi K; Sumii T
    Shikwa Gakuho; 1990 Feb; 90(2):225-30. PubMed ID: 2135095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Variability in the shape of maxillary vestibular impressions recorded with modeling plastic and a polyether impression material.
    Tan HK; Hooper PM; Baergen CG
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(3):282-9. PubMed ID: 8957865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The dimensional accuracy of four impression techniques with the use of addition silicone impression materials.
    Al-Bakri IA; Hussey D; Al-Omari WM
    J Clin Dent; 2007; 18(2):29-33. PubMed ID: 17508620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwashes as a surfactant for addition-reaction silicone impressions.
    Reshad M; Nesbit M; Petrie A; Setchell D
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2009 Mar; 17(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 19378615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Vinylsiloxanether: a new impression material. Clinical study of implant impressions with vinylsiloxanether versus polyether materials.
    Enkling N; Bayer S; Jöhren P; Mericske-Stern R
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Mar; 14(1):144-51. PubMed ID: 19793332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.