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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2184226)

  • 1. Occlusal accuracy of casts made and articulated differently.
    Peregrina A; Reisbick MH
    J Prosthet Dent; 1990 Apr; 63(4):422-5. PubMed ID: 2184226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspation for two impression techniques.
    Parker MH; Cameron SM; Hughbanks JC; Reid DE
    J Prosthet Dent; 1997 Sep; 78(3):255-9. PubMed ID: 9297641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy and precision of occlusal contacts of stereolithographic casts mounted by digital interocclusal registrations.
    Krahenbuhl JT; Cho SH; Irelan J; Bansal NK
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Aug; 116(2):231-6. PubMed ID: 27068319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dimensional stability and detail reproduction of irreversible hydrocolloid and elastomeric impressions disinfected by immersion.
    Johnson GH; Chellis KD; Gordon GE; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Apr; 79(4):446-53. PubMed ID: 9576321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of disinfection on irreversible hydrocolloid and alternative impression materials and the resultant gypsum casts.
    Suprono MS; Kattadiyil MT; Goodacre CJ; Winer MS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Oct; 108(4):250-8. PubMed ID: 23031732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparing maximum intercuspal contacts of virtual dental patients and mounted dental casts.
    Delong R; Ko CC; Anderson GC; Hodges JS; Douglas WH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Dec; 88(6):622-30. PubMed ID: 12488856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A comparative evaluation of dimensional stability of three types of interocclusal recording materials-an in-vitro multi-centre study.
    Tejo SK; Kumar AG; Kattimani VS; Desai PD; Nalla S; Chaitanya K K
    Head Face Med; 2012 Oct; 8():27. PubMed ID: 23039395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Compressibility of two polyvinyl siloxane interocclusal record materials and its effect on mounted cast relationships.
    Campos AA; Nathanson D
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Oct; 82(4):456-61. PubMed ID: 10512966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A randomized clinical trial to compare diagnostic casts made using plastic and metal trays.
    Damodara EK; Litaker MS; Rahemtulla F; McCracken MS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Dec; 104(6):364-71. PubMed ID: 21095399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of the dimensional accuracy of a combined reversible/irreversible hydrocolloid impression system with other commonly used impression materials.
    Herring HW; Tames MA; Zardiackas LD
    J Prosthet Dent; 1984 Dec; 52(6):795-9. PubMed ID: 6392511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of irreversible hydrocolloids (alginates) for fixed prosthodontics. A comparison between irreversible hydrocolloid, reversible hydrocolloid, and addition silicone for use in the syringe-tray technique.
    Eriksson A; Ockert-Eriksson G; Lockowandt P
    Eur J Oral Sci; 1998 Apr; 106(2 Pt 1):651-60. PubMed ID: 9584912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials.
    Faria AC; Rodrigues RC; Macedo AP; Mattos Mda G; Ribeiro RF
    Braz Oral Res; 2008; 22(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 19148382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Detail reproduction of soft tissue: a comparison of impression materials.
    Pratten DH; Novetsky M
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Feb; 65(2):188-91. PubMed ID: 2051353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dimensional stability of impression materials immersed in an iodophor disinfectant.
    Giblin J; Podesta R; White J
    Int J Prosthodont; 1990; 3(1):72-7. PubMed ID: 2372368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical factors and clinical variation influencing the reproducibility of interocclusal recording methods.
    Eriksson A; Ockert-Eriksson G; Lockowandt P; Eriksson O
    Br Dent J; 2002 Apr; 192(7):395-400; discussion 391. PubMed ID: 12017459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Elastomeric impression materials: a comparison of accuracy of multiple pours.
    Kumar D; Madihalli AU; Reddy KR; Rastogi N; Pradeep NT
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2011 Jul; 12(4):272-8. PubMed ID: 22186862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials.
    Wadhwani CP; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Raigrodski AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Jun; 93(6):530-9. PubMed ID: 15942613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.