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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22117789)

  • 21. Effect of mixing methods on mechanical properties of alginate impression materials.
    Frey G; Lu H; Powers J
    J Prosthodont; 2005 Dec; 14(4):221-5. PubMed ID: 16359477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study.
    Pujari M; Garg P; Prithviraj DR
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The dynamic interaction of water with four dental impression materials during cure.
    Hosseinpour D; Berg JC
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Jun; 18(4):292-300. PubMed ID: 19210607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Accuracy of a new ring-opening metathesis elastomeric dental impression material with spray and immersion disinfection.
    Kronström MH; Johnson GH; Hompesch RW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 20105678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The quality of impressions for crowns and bridges: an assessment of the work received at three commercial dental laboratories. assessing the quality of the impressions of prepared teeth.
    Storey D; Coward TJ
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2013 Jun; 21(2):53-7. PubMed ID: 23888527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Bond strength of three nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials to a light-activated resin tray.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    Int J Prosthodont; 1992; 5(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 1520444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effect of various interim fixed prosthodontic materials on the polymerization of elastomeric impression materials.
    Al-Sowygh ZH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):176-81. PubMed ID: 24559525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effects of mixing technique on bubble formation in alginate impression material.
    McDaniel TF; Kramer RT; Im F; Snow D
    Gen Dent; 2013; 61(6):35-9. PubMed ID: 24064161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Impression technique. Review of survey findings.
    LaMond GG
    Dent Today; 2002 Jul; 21(7):88-91. PubMed ID: 12242840
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of dimensional accuracy of four different die materials before and after disinfection of the impression: an in vitro study.
    Nandini Y; Vinitha KB; Manvi S; Smitha M
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jul; 14(4):668-74. PubMed ID: 24309347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. An evaluation of student and clinician perception of digital and conventional implant impressions.
    Lee SJ; Macarthur RX; Gallucci GO
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):420-3. PubMed ID: 23998623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Impression Procedures for Metal Frame Removable Partial Dentures as Applied by General Dental Practitioners.
    Fokkinga WA; van Uchelen J; Witter DJ; Mulder J; Creugers NH
    Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(2):166-8. PubMed ID: 26929957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes.
    Yuzbasioglu E; Kurt H; Turunc R; Bilir H
    BMC Oral Health; 2014 Jan; 14():10. PubMed ID: 24479892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. The influence of tray space and repeat pours on the accuracy of monophasic polyvinylsiloxane impression.
    Rajapur A; Dixit S; Hoshing C; Raikar SP
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Nov; 13(6):824-9. PubMed ID: 23404010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical success rates for polyether crown impressions when mixed dynamically and statically.
    Schmitter M; Johnson GH; Faggion C; Klose C; Mitov G; Nothdurft FP; Pospiech PR; Rammelsberg P; Ohlmann B; Schwarz S; Stober T; Schiller P; Pritsch M
    Clin Oral Investig; 2012 Jun; 16(3):951-60. PubMed ID: 21611728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Nov; 92(5):470-6. PubMed ID: 15523336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Adhesion of elastomeric impression materials to trays.
    Bindra B; Heath JR
    J Oral Rehabil; 1997 Jan; 24(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 9049922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. An in vitro study on the dimensional stability of a vinyl polyether silicone impression material over a prolonged storage period.
    Nassar U; Oko A; Adeeb S; El-Rich M; Flores-Mir C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Mar; 109(3):172-8. PubMed ID: 23522366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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