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 *

81 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8205589)

  • 1. Design of an automatic impression testing machine.
    Archien C
    Compendium; 1994 Mar; 15(3):350, 352-5. PubMed ID: 8205589
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sulcus reproduction with elastomeric impression materials: a new in vitro testing method.
    Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Takahashi H; Komatsu M
    Dent Mater; 2008 Dec; 24(12):1655-60. PubMed ID: 18499246
    [TBL] [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. 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]  

  • 5. Presenting a very accurate impression procedure and testing the accuracy of the impression obtained.
    Stern SS
    Dent Today; 2003 Apr; 22(4):72-7. PubMed ID: 12733406
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric impression materials.
    Chen SY; Liang WM; Chen FN
    J Dent; 2004 Nov; 32(8):603-9. PubMed ID: 15476954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Weight and linear dimensional changes of reversible hydrocolloid duplicating materials: effect of storage and re-use.
    Sofou A; Kotsiomiti E; Farmakis N; Kapari D
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1998 Jun; 6(2):79-84. PubMed ID: 9927923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [The deep drawing process in dental technic. A consideration of technical, ergonomic and material testing].
    Peter U; Krause I; Lüdtke M
    Zahntechnik (Berl); 1987 May; 28(3):110-4. PubMed ID: 3482948
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of implant impression splinted techniques: effect of splinting material.
    Assif D; Nissan J; Varsano I; Singer A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1999; 14(6):885-8. PubMed ID: 10612928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Working times of elastomeric impression materials determined by dimensional accuracy.
    Tan E; Chai J; Wozniak WT
    Int J Prosthodont; 1996; 9(2):188-96. PubMed ID: 8639243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials.
    Wadhwani CP; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Raigrodski AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Jun; 93(6):530-9. PubMed ID: 15942613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Pressure generated on a simulated mandibular oral analog by impression materials in custom trays of different design.
    Al-Ahmad A; Masri R; Driscoll CF; von Fraunhofer J; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 16650009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Dimensional accuracy of 2-stage putty-wash impressions: influence of impression trays and viscosity.
    Balkenhol M; Ferger P; Wöstmann B
    Int J Prosthodont; 2007; 20(6):573-5. PubMed ID: 18069363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Physical properties of casts prepared from disinfected alginate.
    Abour MA; O'Neilly PJ; Setchell DJ; Pearson GJ
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1996 Jun; 4(2):87-91. PubMed ID: 9181899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A laboratory investigation of the accuracy of two impression techniques for single-tooth implants.
    Daoudi MF; Setchell DJ; Searson LJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(2):152-8. PubMed ID: 11843452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Benefits of the dual-arch impression technique. Accurate impressions and fewer than 1% remakes.
    Abrams SH
    Dent Today; 2002 Jul; 21(7):56-9. PubMed ID: 12242834
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparative study of dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques using addition silicone impression material.
    Penaflor CF; Semacio RC; De Las Alas LT; Uy HG
    J Philipp Dent Assoc; 1998; 49(4):37-49. PubMed ID: 10202524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.