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 *

679 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24100909)

  • 1. [Gingival retraction paste versus gingival retraction cord for fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review].
    Hong LG; Guo LP; Xue LL
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2013 Aug; 22(4):456-61. PubMed ID: 24100909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A multicenter randomized, controlled clinical trial comparing the use of displacement cords, an aluminum chloride paste, and a combination of paste and cords for tissue displacement.
    Einarsdottir ER; Lang NP; Aspelund T; Pjetursson BE
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jan; 119(1):82-88. PubMed ID: 28478985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Influence of gingival retraction paste versus cord on periodontal health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Wang Y; Fan F; Li X; Zhou Q; He B; Huang X; Huang S; Ma J
    Quintessence Int; 2019; 50(3):234-244. PubMed ID: 30773575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Effect of self-made colloid paste on gingival retraction in dogs].
    Li N; Liu WC; Zhang Y; Han DW; Wang YJ; Hu WQ
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2010 Apr; 19(2):187-91. PubMed ID: 20485985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the use of displacement cords and aluminum chloride paste.
    Bennani V; Aarts JM; Brunton P
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2020 Jun; 32(4):410-415. PubMed ID: 32442353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of efficacy of different gingival displacement materials on gingival sulcus width.
    Prasanna GS; Reddy K; Kumar RK; Shivaprakash S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Mar; 14(2):217-21. PubMed ID: 23811648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. New Zealand dentists' use of gingival retraction techniques for fixed prosthodontics and implants.
    Al-Ani A; Bennani V; Chandler NP; Lyons KM; Thomson WM
    N Z Dent J; 2010 Sep; 106(3):92-6. PubMed ID: 20882737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Clinical performance of intraoral digital impression for fixed prosthodontics: a Meta-analysis.
    Chen L; Chen C; Li ZY; Zhang Q
    Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Jun; 39(3):306-312. PubMed ID: 34041880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Efficacy of Different Gingival Displacement Materials in the Management of Gingival Sulcus Width: A Comparative Study.
    Rathod A; Jacob SS; MAlqahtani A; Valsan I; Majeed R; Premnath A
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Jun; 22(6):703-706. PubMed ID: 34393130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Comparative Evaluation of the Clinical Efficacy of Four Different Gingival Retraction Systems: An In Vivo Study.
    Madaan R; Paliwal J; Sharma V; Meena KK; Dadarwal A; Kumar R
    Cureus; 2022 Apr; 14(4):e23923. PubMed ID: 35530916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Gingival Retraction Methods: A Systematic Review.
    Tabassum S; Adnan S; Khan FR
    J Prosthodont; 2017 Dec; 26(8):637-643. PubMed ID: 27465933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of retraction materials on gingival health: A histopathological study.
    Phatale S; Marawar PP; Byakod G; Lagdive SB; Kalburge JV
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2010 Jan; 14(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 20922077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Gingival Retraction Methods for Fabrication of Fixed Partial Denture: Literature Review.
    S S; Ma VS; Mi VS; F HG; M H
    J Dent Biomater; 2016 Jun; 3(2):205-213. PubMed ID: 28959744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dentists' knowledge and preference regarding gingival displacement methods.
    Alraheam IA; Hattar S; Al-Asmar A; Alhadidi A; Hamour SA; Aldroubi A; Sawair FA
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Aug; 23(1):574. PubMed ID: 37587482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Efficiency of Cordless Versus Cord Techniques of Gingival Retraction: A Systematic Review.
    Huang C; Somar M; Li K; Mohadeb JVN
    J Prosthodont; 2017 Apr; 26(3):177-185. PubMed ID: 26378615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Gingival displacement using diode laser or retraction cords: A comparative clinical study.
    Melilli D; Mauceri R; Albanese A; Matranga D; Pizzo G
    Am J Dent; 2018 Jun; 31(3):131-134. PubMed ID: 30028930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Quality of impressions after use of the Magic FoamCord gingival retraction system--a clinical study of 269 abutment teeth.
    Beier US; Kranewitter R; Dumfahrt H
    Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(2):143-7. PubMed ID: 19418859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 34.