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 *

315 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24559525)

  • 21. Influence of prolonged setting time on permanent deformation of elastomeric impression materials.
    Balkenhol M; Haunschild S; Erbe C; Wöstmann B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2010 May; 103(5):288-94. PubMed ID: 20416412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effect of disinfection of custom tray materials on adhesive properties of several impression material systems.
    Thompson GA; Vermilyea SG; Agar JR
    J Prosthet Dent; 1994 Dec; 72(6):651-6. PubMed ID: 7853264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations.
    Ragain JC; Grosko ML; Raj M; Ryan TN; Johnston WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 11203635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effect of temperature changes on the dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane and polyether impression materials.
    Corso M; Abanomy A; Di Canzio J; Zurakowski D; Morgano SM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Jun; 79(6):626-31. PubMed ID: 9627890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The effect of prophylaxis method on microtensile bond strength of indirect restorations to dentin.
    Soares CJ; Pereira JC; Souza SJ; Menezes MS; Armstrong SR
    Oper Dent; 2012; 37(6):602-9. PubMed ID: 22616925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Correlation of impression removal force with elastomeric impression material rigidity and hardness.
    Walker MP; Alderman N; Petrie CS; Melander J; McGuire J
    J Prosthodont; 2013 Jul; 22(5):362-6. PubMed ID: 23387301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Flow profile of regular and fast-setting elastomeric impression materials using a shark fin testing device.
    Lawson NC; Cakir D; Ramp L; Burgess JO
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2011 Jun; 23(3):171-6. PubMed ID: 21649832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting.
    Berg JC; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Adán-Plaza S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):150-61. PubMed ID: 12886208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of the surface detail reproduction of flexible die material systems.
    Gerrow JD; Price RB
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct; 80(4):485-9. PubMed ID: 9791798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Effect of provisional luting agents on polyvinyl siloxane impression material.
    Jones RH; Cook GS; Moon MG
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Apr; 75(4):360-3. PubMed ID: 8642519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Changes in water contact angles during the first phase of setting of dental impression materials.
    Mondon M; Ziegler C
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 12675455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of defects in surface detail for monophase, 2-phase, and 3-phase impression techniques: an in vitro study.
    Varvara G; Murmura G; Sinjari B; Cardelli P; Caputi S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Feb; 113(2):108-13. PubMed ID: 25438741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effect of conventional and experimental gingival retraction solutions on the tensile strength and inhibition of polymerization of four types of impression materials.
    Sábio S; Franciscone PA; Mondelli J
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2008; 16(4):280-5. PubMed ID: 19089261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Fracture strengths of provisional restorations reinforced with plasma-treated woven polyethylene fiber.
    Samadzadeh A; Kugel G; Hurley E; Aboushala A
    J Prosthet Dent; 1997 Nov; 78(5):447-50. PubMed ID: 9399185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Temperature change in pulp cavity in vitro during the polymerization of provisional resins.
    Chiodera G; Gastaldi G; Millar BJ
    Dent Mater; 2009 Mar; 25(3):321-5. PubMed ID: 18817967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of two polishing pastes on the surface roughness of bis-acryl composite and methacrylate-based resins.
    Sen D; Göller G; Işsever H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Nov; 88(5):527-32. PubMed ID: 12474004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effect of pre-heated composites and flowable liners on Class II gingival margin gap formation.
    Sabatini C; Blunck U; Denehy G; Munoz C
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):663-71. PubMed ID: 21180006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.