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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38739826)

  • 21. [Computer aided design and 3-dimensional printing for the production of custom trays of maxillary edentulous jaws based on 3-dimensional scan of primary impression].
    Chen H; Zhao T; Wang Y; Sun YC
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2016 Oct; 48(5):900-904. PubMed ID: 27752178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays.
    Burns J; Palmer R; Howe L; Wilson R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):250-5. PubMed ID: 12644799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Prosthesis accuracy of fit on 3D-printed casts versus stone casts: A comparative study in the anterior maxilla.
    Abdeen L; Chen YW; Kostagianni A; Finkelman M; Papathanasiou A; Chochlidakis K; Papaspyridakos P
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2022 Dec; 34(8):1238-1246. PubMed ID: 36415927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effect of implant divergence on the accuracy of definitive casts created from traditional and digital implant-level impressions: an in vitro comparative study.
    Lin WS; Harris BT; Elathamna EN; Abdel-Azim T; Morton D
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(1):102-9. PubMed ID: 25615919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Linear dimensional accuracy of a polyvinyl siloxane of varying viscosities using different impression techniques.
    Mishra S; Chowdhary R
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2010 Aug; 1(1):37-46. PubMed ID: 25427185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of a novel 3D-printed custom tray for the impressions of edentulous jaws.
    Deng K; Chen H; Wang Y; Zhou Y; Sun Y
    J Dent; 2022 Oct; 125():104279. PubMed ID: 36070825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effects of custom tray material on the accuracy of master casts.
    Martinez LJ; von Fraunhofer JA
    J Prosthodont; 1998 Jun; 7(2):106-10. PubMed ID: 9743664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A comparison of the accuracy of polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, and plaster impressions for long-span implant-supported prostheses.
    Hoods-Moonsammy VJ; Owen P; Howes DG
    Int J Prosthodont; 2014; 27(5):433-8. PubMed ID: 25191885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effect of disinfection of custom tray materials on adhesive properties of several impression material systems.
    Thompson GA; Vermilyea SG; Agar JR
    J Prosthet Dent; 1994 Dec; 72(6):651-6. PubMed ID: 7853264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The effect of using custom or stock trays on the accuracy of gypsum casts.
    Rueda LJ; Sy-Muñoz JT; Naylor WP; Goodacre CJ; Swartz ML
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(4):367-73. PubMed ID: 8957875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effect of impression volume and double-arch trays on the registration of maximum intercuspation.
    Hahn SM; Millstein PL; Kinnunen TH; Wright RF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Dec; 102(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 19961994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: a review of properties and techniques.
    Chee WW; Donovan TE
    J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Nov; 68(5):728-32. PubMed ID: 1432791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Different implant impression techniques for edentulous patients treated with CAD/CAM complete-arch prostheses: a randomised controlled trial reporting data at 3 year post-loading.
    Pozzi A; Tallarico M; Mangani F; Barlattani A
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2013; 6(4):325-40. PubMed ID: 24570979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Chairside 3-D printed impression trays: a new approach to increase the accuracy of conventional implant impression taking? An in vitro study.
    Schmidt A; Berschin C; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MA
    Int J Implant Dent; 2023 Dec; 9(1):47. PubMed ID: 38052992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):143-9. PubMed ID: 12886207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Stone Models Fabricated by Three Different Impression Techniques Using Two Brands of Polyvinyl Siloxane Impression Materials.
    Garg S; Kumar S; Jain S; Aggarwal R; Choudhary S; Reddy NK
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2019 Aug; 20(8):928-934. PubMed ID: 31797849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material in removable prosthodontics. Part 1: edentulous impressions.
    Massad JJ; Cagna DR
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2007 Aug; 28(8):452-9; quiz 460, 470. PubMed ID: 18578103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Working times and dimensional accuracy of the one-step putty/wash impression technique.
    Richards MW; Zeiaei S; Bagby MD; Okubo S; Soltani J
    J Prosthodont; 1998 Dec; 7(4):250-5. PubMed ID: 10196845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 3D evaluation of the effect of disinfectants on dimensional accuracy and stability of two elastomeric impression materials.
    Soganci G; Cinar D; Caglar A; Yagiz A
    Dent Mater J; 2018 Jul; 37(4):675-684. PubMed ID: 29848853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Progress in research and application of the edentulous custom trays].
    Sun YC; Jin EL; Zhao T; Wang Y; Ye HQ; Zhou YS
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Nov; 51(11):698-701. PubMed ID: 27806767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.