235 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23811648)
21. A three-die cast technique for duplicating free gingival form in zirconia crowns: two case reports.
Nozawa T; Tanaka K; Tsurumaki S; Ookame Y; Enomoto H; Ito K
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2012 Aug; 32(4):e135-41. PubMed ID: 22577656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Three New Gingival Retraction Systems: A Comparative Study.
Kumari S; Singh P; Parmar UG; Patel AM
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Aug; 22(8):922-927. PubMed ID: 34753845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Effective hemostasis and tissue management.
Elledge D
Dent Today; 2010 Oct; 29(10):150, 152-3. PubMed ID: 21086805
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Accurate transfer of soft tissue morphology with interim prosthesis to definitive cast.
Noh K; Kwon KR; Kim HS; Kim DS; Pae A
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Feb; 111(2):159-62. PubMed ID: 24286639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. [Gingival displacement techniques in daily practice. Survey among dental surgeons in Abidjan, Ivory Coast].
Pesson DM; Bakou OD; Didia EL; Kouame A; Blohoua MR; Djeredou KB
Odontostomatol Trop; 2015 Dec; 38(152):25-32. PubMed ID: 26939218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Drugs in dentistry. Agents for gingival retraction.
Ciancio SG
Dent Manage; 1986 Jul; 26(7):59-61. PubMed ID: 3525263
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of 3 medicaments on the dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
O'Mahony A; Spencer P; Williams K; Corcoran J
Quintessence Int; 2000 Mar; 31(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 11203927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Three-dimensional model analysis of the gingival sulcus width from different retraction time].
Zhang Jj; Liu Yh; Lv Pj; Zhao Yj
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2011 Feb; 43(1):73-6. PubMed ID: 21321624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Simplifying and improving soft-tissue management for fixed-prosthodontic impressions.
Christensen GJ
J Am Dent Assoc; 2013 Feb; 144(2):198-200. PubMed ID: 23372137
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. To cord or not to cord? That is still a question.
Veitz-Keenan A; Keenan JR
Evid Based Dent; 2017 Mar; 18(1):21-22. PubMed ID: 28338036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Effect of different retraction and impression techniques on the marginal fit of crowns.
Wöstmann B; Rehmann P; Trost D; Balkenhol M
J Dent; 2008 Jul; 36(7):508-12. PubMed ID: 18479801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [Gingival retraction methods. A literature review].
Tosches NA; Salvi GE
Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 2009; 119(2):121-38. PubMed ID: 19306598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A clinical study on the effects of cordless and conventional retraction techniques on the gingival and periodontal health.
Al Hamad KQ; Azar WZ; Alwaeli HA; Said KN
J Clin Periodontol; 2008 Dec; 35(12):1053-8. PubMed ID: 19040582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Comparison of Gingival Retraction Materials Using a New Gingival Sulcus Model.
Dederichs M; Fahmy MD; Kuepper H; Guentsch A
J Prosthodont; 2019 Aug; 28(7):784-789. PubMed ID: 31206914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effects of gingival retraction materials on gingival blood flow.
Polat NT; Ozdemir AK; Turgut M
Int J Prosthodont; 2007; 20(1):57-62. PubMed ID: 17319365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An
Thimmappa M; Bhatia M; Somani P; Kumar DRV
J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2018; 18(2):122-130. PubMed ID: 29692565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Clinical evaluation of different gingival retraction cords.
Kumbuloglu O; User A; Toksavul S; Boyacioglu H
Quintessence Int; 2007 Feb; 38(2):e92-8. PubMed ID: 17510720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Gingival displacement for impression making in fixed prosthodontics: contemporary principles, materials, and techniques.
Baba NZ; Goodacre CJ; Jekki R; Won J
Dent Clin North Am; 2014 Jan; 58(1):45-68. PubMed ID: 24286645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparative clinical efficacy evaluation of three gingival displacement systems.
Shrivastava KJ; Bhoyar A; Agarwal S; Shrivastava S; Parlani S; Murthy V
J Nat Sci Biol Med; 2015 Aug; 6(Suppl 1):S53-7. PubMed ID: 26604620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
