182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31206914)
1. Comparison of Gingival Retraction Materials Using a New Gingival Sulcus Model.
Dederichs M; Fahmy MD; Kuepper H; Guentsch A
J Prosthodont; 2019 Aug; 28(7):784-789. PubMed ID: 31206914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of pressure generated by cordless gingival displacement materials.
Bennani V; Inger M; Aarts JM
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Aug; 112(2):163-7. PubMed ID: 24529659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of four cordless gingival displacement systems: A clinical study.
Rayyan MM; Hussien ANM; Sayed NM; Abdallah R; Osman E; El Saad NA; Ramadan S
J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Feb; 121(2):265-270. PubMed ID: 30722986
[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. A comparison of pressure generated by cordless gingival displacement techniques.
Bennani V; Aarts JM; He LH
J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Jun; 107(6):388-92. PubMed ID: 22633595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Correlation of pressure and displacement during gingival displacement: An in vitro study.
Bennani V; Aarts JM; Schumayer D
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Mar; 115(3):296-300. PubMed ID: 26548889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of gingival displacement cord and cordless systems on the closure, displacement, and inflammation of the gingival crevice.
Chandra S; Singh A; Gupta KK; Chandra C; Arora V
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Feb; 115(2):177-82. PubMed ID: 26443067
[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. A clinical study on the effects of cordless and conventional retraction techniques on the gingival and periodontal health.
Al Hamad KQ; Azar WZ; Alwaeli HA; Said KN
J Clin Periodontol; 2008 Dec; 35(12):1053-8. PubMed ID: 19040582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer).
Kumar L; Mattoo KA; Jain S; Khalid I; Kota MZ; Baig FAH; Ibrahim M; Javali MA; Khader MA; Kanji MA
Med Sci Monit; 2023 Apr; 29():e940098. PubMed ID: 37183802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Three-dimensional model analysis of the gingival sulcus width from different retraction time].
Zhang Jj; Liu Yh; Lv Pj; Zhao Yj
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2011 Feb; 43(1):73-6. PubMed ID: 21321624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. The Impact of Expasyl® Gingival Retraction Paste on the Bond Strength of Self-etch and Total-etch Systems.
Al Baker AM; El Araby A; Al Amri MD; Sukumaran A
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2015 May; 16(5):335-9. PubMed ID: 26162250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of Aluminum Chloride Retraction Cords, Expasyl, and Tetrahydrozoline-Soaked Retraction Systems in Gingival Retraction.
Kavita K; Sinha RI; Singh R; Singh R; Reddy KRP; Kulkarni G
J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2020 Aug; 12(Suppl 1):S440-S443. PubMed ID: 33149502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
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. Effect of a cordless retraction paste material on implant surfaces: an in vitro study.
Chang YS; Bennani V; Tawse-Smith A; Girvan L
Braz Oral Res; 2011; 25(6):492-9. PubMed ID: 22147228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. [Effect of self-made colloid paste on gingival retraction in dogs].
Li N; Liu WC; Zhang Y; Han DW; Wang YJ; Hu WQ
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2010 Apr; 19(2):187-91. PubMed ID: 20485985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
