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: 31040552)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparative evaluation of the amount of gingival displacement produced by three different gingival retraction systems: An in vivo study.
    Chaudhari J; Prajapati P; Patel J; Sethuraman R; Naveen YG
    Contemp Clin Dent; 2015; 6(2):189-95. PubMed ID: 26097353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Evaluation of alpha-adrenomimetic agents for gingival retraction: A randomized crossover clinical trial.
    Mehra N; Rathi A; Sharma R; Kaushik M; Sood T
    J Conserv Dent; 2019; 22(6):533-537. PubMed ID: 33088060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 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. 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]  

  • 18. Evaluation of Gingival Displacement with Aluminum Chloride and Naphazoline Hydrochloride: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    de Carvalho WF; Junior LCV; Junior HFB; Suguiura TPDS; Previdelli ITS; Sábio S
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2021 Feb; 29(1):47-53. PubMed ID: 33026719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Effect of different kinds of gingival retraction agents on the polymerization inhibition of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials].
    Hou QQ; Ge H; Gao YM
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2023 Jun; 32(3):251-254. PubMed ID: 37803978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.