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.
151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25511355)
1. Changing the bonding force of impression tray to edentulous maxillary jaw simulator with impression valve system: in vitro study. Akpinar YZ; Yilmaz B; Tatar N; Demirtag Z Niger J Clin Pract; 2015; 18(1):115-9. PubMed ID: 25511355 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of relief space and escape holes on pressure characteristics of maxillary edentulous impressions. Komiyama O; Saeki H; Kawara M; Kobayashi K; Otake S J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Jun; 91(6):570-6. PubMed ID: 15211300 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Pressure generated on a simulated oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different designs. Masri R; Driscoll CF; Burkhardt J; Von Fraunhofer A; Romberg E J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 12237795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Computer aided design and 3-dimensional printing for the production of custom trays of maxillary edentulous jaws based on 3-dimensional scan of primary impression]. Chen H; Zhao T; Wang Y; Sun YC Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2016 Oct; 48(5):900-904. PubMed ID: 27752178 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review. Papaspyridakos P; Chen CJ; Gallucci GO; Doukoudakis A; Weber HP; Chronopoulos V Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):836-45. PubMed ID: 25032763 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influences of differences in tray design and impression material on impression pressure at edentulous mandible. Inoue S; Kawara M; Iida T; Iwasaki M; Komiyama O J Oral Sci; 2017 Dec; 59(4):505-510. PubMed ID: 28855443 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pressure generated on a simulated mandibular oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different design. Al-Ahmad A; Masri R; Driscoll CF; von Fraunhofer J; Romberg E J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 16650009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. On Comparing Two Different Tray-Holding Techniques for Edentulous Maxillary Impressions. Rignon-Bret C; Mushegyan V; Naveau A Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(2):169-72. PubMed ID: 26929958 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Analysis of Different Impression Techniques and Materials on Multiple Implants Through 3-Dimensional Laser Scanner. Pera F; Pesce P; Bevilacqua M; Setti P; Menini M Implant Dent; 2016 Apr; 25(2):232-7. PubMed ID: 26517068 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Effect of Edentulous Maxillary Impression Tray Designs When Flabby Tissue Is Present: An In Vitro Study. Shin JO; Huh YH; Cho LR; Park CJ Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(5):467-72. PubMed ID: 27611750 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Displacement of Simulated Flabby Tissue by Different Tray Designs and Impression Materials. Shin JO; Ko KH; Huh YH; Cho LR; Park CJ J Prosthodont; 2019 Apr; 28(4):444-451. PubMed ID: 30767324 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical trial investigating success rates for polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impressions made with full-arch and dual-arch plastic trays. Johnson GH; Mancl LA; Schwedhelm ER; Verhoef DR; Lepe X J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 20105676 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Application evaluation of prefabricated rigid connecting bar in implants immediate impression preparation of edentulous jaw]. Wang J; Yu HJ; Sun JD; Qiu LX Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2022 Feb; 54(1):187-192. PubMed ID: 35165489 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Different Impression Techniques When Using the All-on-Four Implant Treatment Protocol. Siadat H; Alikhasi M; Beyabanaki E; Rahimian S Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(3):265-70. PubMed ID: 27148987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure. Menini M; Setti P; Pera F; Pera P; Pesce P Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Apr; 22(3):1253-1262. PubMed ID: 28965251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Influence of Edentulous Tray Modification on the Pressure Distribution of the Impression: An In Vitro Study. Chang Y; Maeda Y; Wada M; Gonda T; Ikebe K Int J Prosthodont; 2019; 32(3):278-280. PubMed ID: 31034545 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Digital impression and jaw relation record for the fabrication of CAD/CAM custom tray. Kanazawa M; Iwaki M; Arakida T; Minakuchi S J Prosthodont Res; 2018 Oct; 62(4):509-513. PubMed ID: 29555174 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Edentulous jaw impression techniques: An in vivo comparison of trueness. Chebib N; Kalberer N; Srinivasan M; Maniewicz S; Perneger T; Müller F J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Apr; 121(4):623-630. PubMed ID: 30580982 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Progress in research and application of the edentulous custom trays]. Sun YC; Jin EL; Zhao T; Wang Y; Ye HQ; Zhou YS Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Nov; 51(11):698-701. PubMed ID: 27806767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of a novel 3D-printed custom tray for the impressions of edentulous jaws. Deng K; Chen H; Wang Y; Zhou Y; Sun Y J Dent; 2022 Oct; 125():104279. PubMed ID: 36070825 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]