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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3475458)

  • 1. Compatibility of type IV dental stones with polyvinyl siloxane impression materials.
    Schelb E; Mazzocco CV; Jones JD; Prihoda T
    J Prosthet Dent; 1987 Jul; 58(1):19-22. PubMed ID: 3475458
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Surface detail reproduction of Type IV dental stones with selected polyvinyl siloxane impression materials.
    Schelb E; Cavazos E; Troendle KB; Prihoda TJ
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Jan; 22(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 1784720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of vacuum and pressure on accuracy, reproducibility, and surface finish of stone casts made from polyvinyl siloxane.
    Morford HT; Tames RR; Zardiackas LD
    J Prosthet Dent; 1986 Apr; 55(4):466-70. PubMed ID: 3457179
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of surfactant on surface hardness of dental stone and investment casts produced from polyvinyl siloxane duplicating materials.
    Al-Johani A; Clark RK; Juszczyk AS; Radford DR
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2008 Jun; 16(2):77-80. PubMed ID: 18637383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of the compatibility of elastomeric impression materials, type IV dental stones, and liquid media.
    Gerrow JD; Schneider RL
    J Prosthet Dent; 1987 Mar; 57(3):292-8. PubMed ID: 3553549
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Compatibility of type IV dental stones with polyether impression materials.
    Schelb E; Cavazos E; Kaiser DA; Troendle K
    J Prosthet Dent; 1988 Nov; 60(5):540-2. PubMed ID: 3058934
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of dimensional accuracy between three different addition cured silicone impression materials.
    Forrester-Baker L; Seymour KG; Samarawickrama D; Zou L; Cherukara G; Patel M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2005 Jun; 13(2):69-74. PubMed ID: 16011234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of frequency and amplitude of vibration on void formation in dies poured from polyvinyl siloxane impressions.
    Abdullah MA
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct; 80(4):490-4. PubMed ID: 9791799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. An Investigation into the Accuracy of Two Currently Available Dental Impression Materials in the Construction of Cobalt-Chromium Frameworks for Removable Partial Dentures.
    Dubal RK; Friel T; Taylor PD
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2015 Mar; 23(1):16-28. PubMed ID: 26415334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Margin adaptation of indirect composite inlays fabricated on flexible dies.
    Price RB; Gerrow JD
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):306-13. PubMed ID: 10709039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of the surface detail reproduction of flexible die material systems.
    Gerrow JD; Price RB
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct; 80(4):485-9. PubMed ID: 9791798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Compatibility of a new epoxy resin with impression materials.
    Schelb E; Baracat SA; Almaguer R
    Am J Dent; 1990 Aug; 3(4):171-4. PubMed ID: 2076244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of three implant impression techniques with different impression materials and stones.
    Chang WG; Vahidi F; Bae KH; Lim BS
    Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(1):44-7. PubMed ID: 22259795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mastering the impression technique for simple to complex treatments.
    Paquette JM; Sheets CG
    Dent Today; 2000 Jun; 19(6):68-75. PubMed ID: 12524795
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations.
    Ragain JC; Grosko ML; Raj M; Ryan TN; Johnston WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 11203635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantification of hydrogen gas released from polyvinylsiloxane impression materials in contact with die stone materials.
    McCrosson J; Sharkey SW; Smith GM; Anderson RA
    J Dent; 1987 Jun; 15(3):129-32. PubMed ID: 3475300
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of detail reproduction for three die materials by using scanning electron microscopy and two-dimensional profilometry.
    Derrien G; Le Menn G
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Jul; 74(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 7674178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Compatibility of reversible hydrocolloid duplicating materials and dental stones.
    Williams EO; Hartman GE
    J Prosthet Dent; 1984 Nov; 52(5):699-703. PubMed ID: 6593462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of the Association Between the Tray and Impression Techniques on Angulated Implants Using the All-on-Four System.
    de Avila ED; Castanharo SM; Casalle N; Vasconcelos JA; de Assis Mollo F
    J Oral Implantol; 2015 Jul; 41 Spec No():382-5. PubMed ID: 24641165
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.