156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24529659)
1. Comparison of pressure generated by cordless gingival displacement materials.
Bennani V; Inger M; Aarts JM
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):163-7. PubMed ID: 24529659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison of pressure generated by cordless gingival displacement techniques.
Bennani V; Aarts JM; He LH
J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Jun; 107(6):388-92. PubMed ID: 22633595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Correlation of pressure and displacement during gingival displacement: An in vitro study.
Bennani V; Aarts JM; Schumayer D
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Mar; 115(3):296-300. PubMed ID: 26548889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Effect of gingival displacement cord and cordless systems on the closure, displacement, and inflammation of the gingival crevice.
Chandra S; Singh A; Gupta KK; Chandra C; Arora V
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Feb; 115(2):177-82. PubMed ID: 26443067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. The Influence of Hemostatic Agents and Cordless Gingival Retraction Materials on Smear Layer: An Ex vivo Scanning Electron Microscope Analysis.
Sahu SK; Nagda SJ
Int J Appl Basic Med Res; 2021; 11(3):143-147. PubMed ID: 34458115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A clinical comparison of cordless and conventional displacement systems regarding clinical performance and impression quality.
Acar Ö; Erkut S; Özçelik TB; Ozdemır E; Akçil M
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 May; 111(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 24360008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of a cordless retraction paste material on implant surfaces: an in vitro study.
Chang YS; Bennani V; Tawse-Smith A; Girvan L
Braz Oral Res; 2011; 25(6):492-9. PubMed ID: 22147228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Effects of Gingival Retraction Paste and Subsequent Cleaning with Hydrogen Peroxide on the Polymerization of Three Elastomeric Impression Materials: An In Vitro Study.
Abduljabbar TS; Al Amri MD; Al Rifaiy MQ; Al-Sowygh ZH; Vohra FA; Balous MA; Alqarni AS; Alotaibi AO
J Prosthodont; 2019 Jul; 28(6):709-714. PubMed ID: 28960658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. [Synthesis and evaluation of a novel injectable and water-swelling gingival displacement materials].
Xu X; Zhu X; Ning T; Liu W; Li Q
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2012 Apr; 30(2):139-42. PubMed ID: 22594228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparative Evaluation of the Amount of Gingival Displacement Using Three Recent Gingival Retraction Systems -
Qureshi SM; Anasane NS; Kakade D
Contemp Clin Dent; 2020; 11(1):28-33. PubMed ID: 33110305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
