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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 5549709)

  • 1. Pneumatic, multiple, simultaneous inoculator for plastic trays.
    Zussman RA
    Appl Microbiol; 1971 Feb; 21(2):374-6. PubMed ID: 5549709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Distortion of disposable plastic stock trays when used with putty vinyl polysiloxane impression materials.
    Cho GC; Chee WW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Oct; 92(4):354-8. PubMed ID: 15507908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray.
    Ceyhan JA; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Phillips KM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Sep; 90(3):228-34. PubMed ID: 12942055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Proceedings: Netherlands Society for Microbiology meeting at Utrecht on 2 May 1973. An automatic inoculator.
    Raemaekers KG; de Jonge PH
    Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek; 1973 Nov; 39(4):663-4. PubMed ID: 4543764
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of the Dies Affected by Tray Type, Material Viscosity, and Pouring Sequence of Dual and Single Arch Impressions- An In vitro Study.
    Kulkarni PR; Kulkarni RS; Shah RJ; Chhajlani R; Saklecha B; Maru K
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2017 Apr; 11(4):ZC128-ZC135. PubMed ID: 28571280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Efficacy of tray adhesives for the adhesion of elastomer rubber impression materials to impression modeling plastics for border molding.
    Nishigawa G; Sato T; Suenaga K; Minagi S
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Feb; 79(2):140-4. PubMed ID: 9513098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The financial and environmental costs of reusable and single-use plastic anaesthetic drug trays.
    McGain F; McAlister S; McGavin A; Story D
    Anaesth Intensive Care; 2010 May; 38(3):538-44. PubMed ID: 20514965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of complete dental arch impressions and stone casts using a three-dimensional measurement system. Effects on accuracy of rubber impression materials and trays.
    Ishida K
    Dent Jpn (Tokyo); 1990; 27(1):73-9. PubMed ID: 2099294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A clinical pilot study of the dimensional accuracy of double-arch and complete-arch impressions.
    Cox JR; Brandt RL; Hughes HJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 May; 87(5):510-5. PubMed ID: 12070514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Native mass spectrometry: a powerful tool for structural biology?
    Free T
    Biotechniques; 2019 Nov; 67(5):204-206. PubMed ID: 31646876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials in custom-made and stock trays.
    Valderhaug J; Fløystrand F
    J Prosthet Dent; 1984 Oct; 52(4):514-7. PubMed ID: 6389833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. MBCs for Staphylococcus aureus as determined by macrodilution and microdilution techniques.
    Shanholtzer CJ; Peterson LR; Mohn ML; Moody JA; Gerding DN
    Antimicrob Agents Chemother; 1984 Aug; 26(2):214-9. PubMed ID: 6486764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Portable tray for microbiologic and cytologic examination.
    Spinak M
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1974 Nov; 78(5):857-9. PubMed ID: 4417516
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Disposable plastic trays and their effect on polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impression accuracy-an in vitro study.
    Rues S; Stober T; Bargum T; Rammelsberg P; Zenthöfer A
    Clin Oral Investig; 2021 Mar; 25(3):1475-1484. PubMed ID: 32885321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An in vivo investigation of seating and removal forces associated with recording impressions in dentate patients.
    Sotiriou M; Hobkirk JA
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Nov; 74(5):455-62. PubMed ID: 8809249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The accuracy of dual-arch impressions: a pilot study.
    Larson TD; Nielsen MA; Brackett WW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jun; 87(6):625-7. PubMed ID: 12131884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Microfabricated 384-lane capillary array electrophoresis bioanalyzer for ultrahigh-throughput genetic analysis.
    Emrich CA; Tian H; Medintz IL; Mathies RA
    Anal Chem; 2002 Oct; 74(19):5076-83. PubMed ID: 12380833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Effects of different tray types on the resulting impression].
    Biffar R; Bittner B
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Aug; 44(8):624-7. PubMed ID: 2700730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.