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 *

83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 4565327)

  • 1. Trayless brush-and-syringe impressions and tray-supported impressions compared by stereophotogrammetry.
    Siirilä HS; Nevakari K
    Proc Finn Dent Soc; 1972; 68(2):53-7. PubMed ID: 4565327
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Dimensional accuracy of dies obtained from multiple impressions of cavity preparation. I- Silicones].
    Sansiviero A; Miura M; Simonetti EL; de Carvalho RC
    Rev Fac Odontol Sao Jose Dos Campos; 1974; 3(2):85-91. PubMed ID: 4620796
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time.
    Thongthammachat S; Moore BK; Barco MT; Hovijitra S; Brown DT; Andres CJ
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Jun; 11(2):98-108. PubMed ID: 12087547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study.
    Caputi S; Varvara G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Apr; 99(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 18395537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ; Hertrampf K
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [TBL] [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. [Modification of the perforated impression tray to allow digital impressions on a level with the premolar-molar region without damage to the material and quality of the impression (alginate in particular)].
    Bousquet F
    Rev Odontostomatol Midi Fr; 1979; 37(2):103-7. PubMed ID: 398573
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A clinical trial to compare double-arch and complete-arch impression techniques in the provision of indirect restorations.
    Lane DA; Randall RC; Lane NS; Wilson NH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Feb; 89(2):141-5. PubMed ID: 12616233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Impressions for complete dentures using new silicone impression materials.
    Hayakawa I; Watanabe I
    Quintessence Int; 2003 Mar; 34(3):177-80. PubMed ID: 12731598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A clinical evaluation of fixed partial denture impressions.
    Samet N; Shohat M; Livny A; Weiss EI
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Aug; 94(2):112-7. PubMed ID: 16046964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An analysis of the persistent presence of opportunistic pathogens on patient-derived dental impressions and gypsum casts.
    Egusa H; Watamoto T; Abe K; Kobayashi M; Kaneda Y; Ashida S; Matsumoto T; Yatani H
    Int J Prosthodont; 2008; 21(1):62-8. PubMed ID: 18350950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Taking impressions for prosthetic treatment of patients after resection of the maxilla and palate].
    Aksenov IuV
    Stomatologiia (Mosk); 1967; 46(1):78-81. PubMed ID: 5334785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. [Why should we use plaster for the prime impression in complete removable prosthodontics].
    Koffi NJ; Koffi KG; Assi KD
    Odontostomatol Trop; 2005 Sep; 28(111):17-22. PubMed ID: 16398307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [The preparation of silicone impressions using the Cardex metal syringe pistol and the Orec 180 alloy].
    Zahntechnik (Zur); 1967; 25():113-6. PubMed ID: 4232529
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pressure generated on a simulated oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different designs.
    Masri R; Driscoll CF; Burkhardt J; Von Fraunhofer A; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):155-60. PubMed ID: 12237795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of storage time on the accuracy and dimensional stability of reversible hydrocolloid impression material.
    Schleier PE; Gardner FM; Nelson SK; Pashley DH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):244-50. PubMed ID: 11552162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Dimensional measures of plaster samples obtained with silicone impressions (b)].
    Hoffer E; Pignanelli M
    Riv Ital Stomatol; 1976; (3):5-15. PubMed ID: 1076818
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Making an implant-level impression using solid plastic, press-fit, closed-tray impression copings: a clinical report.
    Selecman AM; Wicks RA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Mar; 101(3):158-9. PubMed ID: 19231566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.