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 *

453 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26415334)

  • 21. Use of polyvinyl siloxane material for an altered cast impression tray.
    Hsu YT
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Sep; 112(3):695-6. PubMed ID: 24657176
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The effects of different storage conditions on polyether and polyvinylsiloxane impressions.
    Purk JH; Willes MG; Tira DE; Eick JD; Hung SH
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1998 Jul; 129(7):1014-21. PubMed ID: 9685767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effects of reheating on the accuracy of addition silicone putty-wash impressions.
    Tjan AH; Li T
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Jun; 65(6):743-8. PubMed ID: 2072314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effect of measurement site on the dimensional accuracy of die-forming materials and techniques.
    Petrie CS; Walker MP; Theodotou N; Glaros AG; Williams K
    Gen Dent; 2004; 52(3):228-32. PubMed ID: 15206253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of outgassing, tear strength, and detail reproduction in alginate substitute materials.
    Baxter RT; Lawson NC; Cakir D; Beck P; Ramp LC; Burgess JO
    Oper Dent; 2012; 37(5):540-7. PubMed ID: 22339382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The influence of verification jig on framework fit for nonsegmented fixed implant-supported complete denture.
    Ercoli C; Geminiani A; Feng C; Lee H
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 May; 14 Suppl 1():e188-95. PubMed ID: 22176765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of the precision of three implant transfer impression techniques using two elastomeric impression materials.
    Mostafa TM; Elgendy MN; Kashef NA; Halim MM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(6):525-8. PubMed ID: 21209987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Clinical efficacy of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials using the one-step two-viscosity impression technique.
    Dogan S; Schwedhelm ER; Heindl H; Mancl L; Raigrodski AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Aug; 114(2):217-22. PubMed ID: 25976708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Quality of materials supplied to dental laboratories for the fabrication of cobalt chromium removable partial dentures in Ireland.
    Lynch CD; Allen PF
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2003 Dec; 11(4):176-80. PubMed ID: 14737795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A review of 243 errors possible during the fabrication of a removable partial denture: part I.
    Rudd RW; Rudd KD
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):251-61. PubMed ID: 11552163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Experimental study on the use of spacer foils in two-step putty and wash impression procedures using silicone impression materials.
    Mann K; Davids A; Range U; Richter G; Boening K; Reitemeier B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):316-22. PubMed ID: 25453563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Determining the accuracy of stock and custom tray impression/casts.
    Millstein P; Maya A; Segura C
    J Oral Rehabil; 1998 Aug; 25(8):645-8. PubMed ID: 9781870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods.
    Cho SH; Schaefer O; Thompson GA; Guentsch A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):310-5. PubMed ID: 25682531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Effect of different impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of impressions using various elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study.
    Singh K; Sahoo S; Prasad KD; Goel M; Singh A
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jan; 13(1):98-106. PubMed ID: 22430701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis.
    Del'Acqua MA; Chávez AM; Amaral AL; Compagnoni MA; Mollo Fde A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(4):771-6. PubMed ID: 20657873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of castability and surface roughness of commercially pure titanium and cobalt-chromium denture frameworks.
    Jang KS; Youn SJ; Kim YS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jul; 86(1):93-8. PubMed ID: 11458267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The influence of tray type and other variables on the palatal depth of casts made from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions.
    Frank RP; Thielke SM; Johnson GH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jan; 87(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 11807479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Quality of communication and master impressions for the fabrication of cobalt chromium removable partial dentures in general dental practice in England, Ireland and Wales in 2009.
    Kilfeather GP; Lynch CD; Sloan AJ; Youngson CC
    J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Apr; 37(4):300-5. PubMed ID: 20085617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.