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 *

183 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24360008)

  • 21. Polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents.
    Nowakowska D; Raszewski Z; Saczko J; Kulbacka J; Więckiewicz W
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):168-75. PubMed ID: 24461950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 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. [Access to the intracrevicular space in preparations for fixed prosthesis].
    Porzier J; Benner-Jordan L; Bourdeau B; Losfeld R
    Cah Prothese; 1991 Mar; (73):6-20. PubMed ID: 2013007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Clinical outcomes of three different crown systems with CAD/CAM technology.
    Batson ER; Cooper LF; Duqum I; Mendonça G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Oct; 112(4):770-7. PubMed ID: 24980739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Comparison of the new matrix system with traditional fixed prosthodontic impression procedures.
    Livaditis GJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Feb; 79(2):200-7. PubMed ID: 9513107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Clinical Assessment of Gingival Sulcus Width using Various Gingival Displacement Materials.
    Goutham GB; Jayanti I; Jalaluddin M; Avijeeta A; Ramanna PK; Joy J
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 May; 19(5):502-506. PubMed ID: 29807958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of Gingival Displacement with Aluminum Chloride and Naphazoline Hydrochloride: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    de Carvalho WF; Junior LCV; Junior HFB; Suguiura TPDS; Previdelli ITS; Sábio S
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2021 Feb; 29(1):47-53. PubMed ID: 33026719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Fluid absorbency of retraction cords after soaking in aluminum chloride solution.
    Runyan DA; Reddy TG; Shimoda LM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1988 Dec; 60(6):676-8. PubMed ID: 3060598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Soft-tissue management. The key to the perfect impression.
    Radz GM
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2010; 31(6):463-5. PubMed ID: 20712110
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The effect of one-step vs. two-step impression techniques on long-term accuracy and dimensional stability when the finish line is within the gingival sulcular area.
    Levartovsky S; Zalis M; Pilo R; Harel N; Ganor Y; Brosh T
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Feb; 23(2):124-33. PubMed ID: 23734561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Clinical acceptance of single-unit crowns and its association with impression and tissue displacement techniques: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.
    Lawson NC; Litaker MS; Sowell E; Gordan VV; Mungia R; Ronzo KR; Lam BT; Gilbert GH; McCracken MS;
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 May; 123(5):701-709. PubMed ID: 31590974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Comparative evaluation of three gingival displacement systems: an in-vivo study.
    Aldhuwayhi S
    Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2023 Sep; 27(17):8019-8025. PubMed ID: 37750631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Current methods of finish-line exposure by practicing prosthodontists.
    Hansen PA; Tira DE; Barlow J
    J Prosthodont; 1999 Sep; 8(3):163-70. PubMed ID: 10740498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparison of four cordless gingival displacement systems: A clinical study.
    Rayyan MM; Hussien ANM; Sayed NM; Abdallah R; Osman E; El Saad NA; Ramadan S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Feb; 121(2):265-270. PubMed ID: 30722986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Clinical trial of gingival retraction cords.
    Jokstad A
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Mar; 81(3):258-61. PubMed ID: 10050111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.