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 *

175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2264016)

  • 1. Impression technique for RPDs. A comparison between two methods.
    Gunne J; Högström J; Nilson H
    Swed Dent J; 1990; 14(5):225-31. PubMed ID: 2264016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. A retrospective comparison of two definitive impression techniques and their associated postinsertion adjustments in complete denture prosthodontics.
    Drago CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2003 Sep; 12(3):192-7. PubMed ID: 14508741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Modified functional impression technique for complete dentures.
    Malachias A; Paranhos Hde F; da Silva CH; Muglia VA; Moreto C
    Braz Dent J; 2005; 16(2):135-9. PubMed ID: 16475608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Mixed impressions (alginate and zinc oxide eugenol) in posterior bilaterally edentulous patients].
    Braun AA; de Vargas HM; Weigert F; Mazzaquatro W
    Rev Gaucha Odontol; 1975; 23(4):283-90. PubMed ID: 802326
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pressure generated on a simulated oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different designs.
    Masri R; Driscoll CF; Burkhardt J; Von Fraunhofer A; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 12237795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sectional impressions for mandibular distal extension removable partial dentures.
    el-Sheikh HA; Abdel-Hakim AM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Aug; 80(2):216-9. PubMed ID: 9710826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparative study of impression procedures for distal extension removable partial dentures.
    Madihalli AU; Tavane PN; Yadav NS; Abraham S; Reddy PM; Baiju G
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2011 Sep; 12(5):333-8. PubMed ID: 22269192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The functional bilaminar impression technique for the distal extension removable partial denture.
    Stillwell KD; Eshelman EG
    Gen Dent; 2007; 55(2):101-4. PubMed ID: 17333979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. [Impressions in removable partial dentures].
    Prapotnich R; Domken O
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2001; 56(3):204-15. PubMed ID: 16193853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The altered cast impression technique: anatomic and functional considerations.
    Stillwell KD
    Todays FDA; 2009 Aug; 21(8):19-21, 23. PubMed ID: 19728461
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quality of written communication and master impressions for fabrication of removable partial prostheses in the Kingdom of Bahrain.
    Radhi A; Lynch CD; Hannigan A
    J Oral Rehabil; 2007 Feb; 34(2):153-7. PubMed ID: 17244238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reproducibility of interocclusal recording for mandibular removable partial denture in bilateral distal extension cases.
    Togano H; Hideshima M; Ohyama T
    J Med Dent Sci; 2003 Mar; 50(1):53-61. PubMed ID: 12715920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of dimensional accuracy between three different addition cured silicone impression materials.
    Forrester-Baker L; Seymour KG; Samarawickrama D; Zou L; Cherukara G; Patel M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2005 Jun; 13(2):69-74. PubMed ID: 16011234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fabrication of a custom-made impression tray for making preliminary impressions of edentulous mandibles.
    Sofou AM; Diakoyianni-Mordohai I; Pissiotis AL; Emmanuel I
    Quintessence Int; 1998 Aug; 29(8):513-6. PubMed ID: 9807132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Impression materials for recording the denture bearing mucosa.
    Koran A
    Dent Clin North Am; 1980 Jan; 24(1):97-111. PubMed ID: 6987107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Extension of zinc oxide-eugenol paste impressions.
    Owall B
    Sven Tandlak Tidskr; 1971 Oct; 64(10):673-9. PubMed ID: 4950176
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of lingual sulcus depth obtained with three impression materials.
    Jooste CH; Bradshaw D; Jooste N
    J Dent Assoc S Afr; 1987 May; 42(5):241-4. PubMed ID: 3313817
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.