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 *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22117789)

  • 1. Practice-based PREP Panel handling evaluation of a new impression mixing device and the associated material.
    Burke FJ; Crisp RJ; Klettke T
    Int Dent J; 2011 Dec; 61(6):321-7. PubMed ID: 22117789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A practice-based assessment of the handling of a fast-setting polyvinyl siloxane impression material used with the dual-arch tray technique.
    Burke FJ; Crisp RJ
    Quintessence Int; 2001; 32(10):805-10. PubMed ID: 11820050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of a novel compule-based gingival retraction system in UK general dental practices.
    Burke FJ; Crisp RJ
    Dent Update; 2014 Jun; 41(5):432-4, 437-8. PubMed ID: 25073225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Assessment of preference of mixing techniques and duration of mixing and tray loading for two viscosities of vinyl polysiloxane material.
    Nam J; Raigrodski AJ; Townsend J; Lepe X; Mancl LA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jan; 97(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 17280886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The influence of the mixing technique on the content of voids in two polyether impression materials.
    Di Felice R; Scotti R; Belser UC
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 2002; 112(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 11892614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of disinfection of custom tray materials on adhesive properties of several impression material systems.
    Thompson GA; Vermilyea SG; Agar JR
    J Prosthet Dent; 1994 Dec; 72(6):651-6. PubMed ID: 7853264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bond strength of two nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials bonded to two thermoplastic resin tray materials.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Dec; 74(6):563-8. PubMed ID: 8778378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Determining the accuracy of stock and custom tray impression/casts.
    Millstein P; Maya A; Segura C
    J Oral Rehabil; 1998 Aug; 25(8):645-8. PubMed ID: 9781870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of tray material and surface condition on the shear bond strength of impression materials.
    Wang RR; Nguyen T; Boyle AM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Nov; 74(5):449-54. PubMed ID: 8809248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of three implant impression techniques with different impression materials and stones.
    Chang WG; Vahidi F; Bae KH; Lim BS
    Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(1):44-7. PubMed ID: 22259795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A prospective clinical evaluation of electronically mixed polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: results from the prosthetic "SuperStudy"--a consumer evaluation.
    Kugel G; Swift EJ; Sorensen JA; Tucker JH; Dunne JT
    Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl; 1999; (24):S3-21; quiz S22. PubMed ID: 11908410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Clinical trial investigating success rates for polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impressions made with full-arch and dual-arch plastic trays.
    Johnson GH; Mancl LA; Schwedhelm ER; Verhoef DR; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 20105676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Passive fit and accuracy of three dental implant impression techniques.
    Al Quran FA; Rashdan BA; Zomar AA; Weiner S
    Quintessence Int; 2012 Feb; 43(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 22257873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis.
    Del'Acqua MA; Chávez AM; Amaral AL; Compagnoni MA; Mollo Fde A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(4):771-6. PubMed ID: 20657873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Use of Pindex system in fabrication of the sectional custom tray.
    Jabbari E; Savabi O; Nejatidanesh F
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Jul; 23(5):417-9. PubMed ID: 24417537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measurement of the accuracy of dental working casts using a coordinate measuring machine.
    Potran M; Štrbac B; Puškar T; Hadžistević M; Hodolič J; Trifković B
    Vojnosanit Pregl; 2016 Oct; 73(10):895-903. PubMed ID: 29327892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.