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 *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32008797)

  • 1. Efficacy of conventional cord versus cordless techniques for gingival displacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Martins FV; Santana RB; Fonseca EM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Jan; 125(1):46-55. PubMed ID: 32008797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Efficiency of Cordless Versus Cord Techniques of Gingival Retraction: A Systematic Review.
    Huang C; Somar M; Li K; Mohadeb JVN
    J Prosthodont; 2017 Apr; 26(3):177-185. PubMed ID: 26378615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. To cord or not to cord? That is still a question.
    Veitz-Keenan A; Keenan JR
    Evid Based Dent; 2017 Mar; 18(1):21-22. PubMed ID: 28338036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of gingival displacement, bleeding and ease of application for polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and conventional retraction cord - a clinical trial.
    Nasim H; Lone MA; Kumar B; Ahmed N; Farooqui WA; Alsahhaf A; Alresayes S; Vohra F; Abduljabbar T
    Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2023 Mar; 27(6):2222-2231. PubMed ID: 37013740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of gingival displacement methods in terms of periodontal health at crown restorations produced by digital scan: 1-year clinical follow-up.
    Ünalan Değirmenci B; Karadağ Naldemir B; Değirmenci A
    Lasers Med Sci; 2021 Aug; 36(6):1323-1335. PubMed ID: 33566189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Influence of gingival retraction paste versus cord on periodontal health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Wang Y; Fan F; Li X; Zhou Q; He B; Huang X; Huang S; Ma J
    Quintessence Int; 2019; 50(3):234-244. PubMed ID: 30773575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Marginal and internal adaptation of single crowns and fixed dental prostheses by using digital and conventional workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Hasanzade M; Aminikhah M; Afrashtehfar KI; Alikhasi M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Sep; 126(3):360-368. PubMed ID: 32928518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Preimpression troughing with the diode laser: A preliminary study.
    Stuffken M; Vahidi F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Apr; 115(4):441-6. PubMed ID: 26723098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A double-blind randomised clinical trial of two techniques for gingival displacement.
    Sarmento HR; Leite FR; Dantas RV; Ogliari FA; Demarco FF; Faot F
    J Oral Rehabil; 2014 Apr; 41(4):306-13. PubMed ID: 24446590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.