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 *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29692565)

  • 1. Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An
    Thimmappa M; Bhatia M; Somani P; Kumar DRV
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2018; 18(2):122-130. PubMed ID: 29692565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparative Study on the Efficacy of Gingival Retraction using Polyvinyl Acetate Strips and Conventional Retraction Cord - An in Vivo Study.
    Shivasakthy M; Asharaf Ali S
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2013 Oct; 7(10):2368-71. PubMed ID: 24298531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Comparative evaluation of three gingival displacement materials for efficacy in tissue management and dimensional accuracy.
    Gajbhiye V; Banerjee R; Jaiswal P; Chandak A; Radke U
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2019; 19(2):173-179. PubMed ID: 31040552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Efficacy of two gingival retraction systems on lateral gingival displacement: A prospective clinical study.
    Anupam P; Namratha N; Vibha S; Anandakrishna GN; Shally K; Singh A
    J Oral Biol Craniofac Res; 2013; 3(2):68-72. PubMed ID: 25737887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. A comparative evaluation of amount of gingival displacement produced by four different gingival displacement agents - An
    Kesari ZI; Karani JT; Mistry SS; Pai AR
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2019; 19(4):313-323. PubMed ID: 31649440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Gingival Retraction Using Polyvinyl Siloxane Foam Retraction System, Vinyl Polysiloxane Paste Retraction System, and Copper Wire Reinforced Retraction Cord in Endodontically Treated Teeth: An
    Mehta S; Virani H; Memon S; Nirmal N
    Contemp Clin Dent; 2019; 10(3):428-432. PubMed ID: 32308315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Three New Gingival Retraction Systems: A Comparative Study.
    Kumari S; Singh P; Parmar UG; Patel AM
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Aug; 22(8):922-927. PubMed ID: 34753845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Trueness of intraoral scanners according to subgingival depth of abutment for fixed prosthesis.
    Son YT; Son K; Lee KB
    Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):20786. PubMed ID: 36456561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Clinical evaluation of three new gingival retraction systems: a research report.
    Gupta A; Prithviraj DR; Gupta D; Shruti DP
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2013 Mar; 13(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 24431705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical evaluation of different gingival retraction cords.
    Kumbuloglu O; User A; Toksavul S; Boyacioglu H
    Quintessence Int; 2007 Feb; 38(2):e92-8. PubMed ID: 17510720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Estimation of cytokine levels in gingival crevicular fluid following the use of different gingival retraction systems in patients requiring fixed partial dentures - An original research.
    Mathew L; Mathew A; Saranya SK; Mohan AS
    J Oral Biol Craniofac Res; 2022; 12(5):709-712. PubMed ID: 36092456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of retraction materials on gingival health: A histopathological study.
    Phatale S; Marawar PP; Byakod G; Lagdive SB; Kalburge JV
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2010 Jan; 14(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 20922077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.