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.
239 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8778378)
41. The effects of custom tray material on the accuracy of master casts. Shafa S; Zaree Z; Mosharraf R J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):49-56. PubMed ID: 18784859 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Dimensional changes and pressure of dental stones set in silicone rubber impressions. Teraoka F; Takahashi J Dent Mater; 2000 Mar; 16(2):145-9. PubMed ID: 11203536 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Effects of relief space and escape holes on pressure characteristics of maxillary edentulous impressions. Komiyama O; Saeki H; Kawara M; Kobayashi K; Otake S J Prosthet Dent; 2004 Jun; 91(6):570-6. PubMed ID: 15211300 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Effect of fabrication process on the bond strength between silicone elastomer and acrylic resin for maxillofacial prosthesis. Hattori M; Sumita YI; Muthiah L; Iwasaki N; Takahashi H; Aimaijiang Y; Yoshi S; Taniguchi H Dent Mater J; 2014; 33(1):16-20. PubMed ID: 24492106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Visual observation of the dynamic flow of elastomer rubber impression material between the impression tray and oral mucosa while seating the impression tray. Nishigawa G; Natsuaki N; Maruo Y; Okamoto M; Minagi S J Oral Rehabil; 2003 Jun; 30(6):608-13. PubMed ID: 12787458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Custom impression trays. Part III: A stress distribution model. Moseley JP; Dixon DL; Breeding LC J Prosthet Dent; 1994 May; 71(5):532-8. PubMed ID: 8006852 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Tear strength of five elastomeric impression materials at two setting times and two tearing rates. Lawson NC; Burgess JO; Litaker M J Esthet Restor Dent; 2008; 20(3):186-93. PubMed ID: 18533981 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Linear dimensional changes in plaster die models using different elastomeric materials. Pereira JR; Murata KY; Valle AL; Ghizoni JS; Shiratori FK Braz Oral Res; 2010; 24(3):336-41. PubMed ID: 20877972 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Evaluation of the precision of three implant transfer impression techniques using two elastomeric impression materials. Mostafa TM; Elgendy MN; Kashef NA; Halim MM Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(6):525-8. PubMed ID: 21209987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Changes in properties of nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials after storage of components. Hondrum SO J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jan; 85(1):73-81. PubMed ID: 11174682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Evaluation of accuracy of casts of multiple internal connection implant prosthesis obtained from different impression materials and techniques: an in vitro study. Pujari M; Garg P; Prithviraj DR J Oral Implantol; 2014 Apr; 40(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 24456531 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Accuracy of implant impressions with different impression coping types and shapes. Rashidan N; Alikhasi M; Samadizadeh S; Beyabanaki E; Kharazifard MJ Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Apr; 14(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 19804420 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. The bond strength of different tray adhesives on vinyl polysiloxane to two tray materials: an in vitro study. Ashwini BL; Manjunath S; Mathew KX J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2014 Mar; 14(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 24604995 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Drying time of tray adhesive for adequate tensile bond strength between polyvinylsiloxane impression and tray resin material. Yi MH; Shim JS; Lee KW; Chung MK J Adv Prosthodont; 2009 Jul; 1(2):63-7. PubMed ID: 21165257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Effect of conventional and experimental gingival retraction solutions on the tensile strength and inhibition of polymerization of four types of impression materials. Sábio S; Franciscone PA; Mondelli J J Appl Oral Sci; 2008; 16(4):280-5. PubMed ID: 19089261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. [Bond between wash elastomers and putty silicones]. Pfeiffer P; Sommer MP; Schwickerath H Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Jul; 46(7):464-7. PubMed ID: 1817908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Correlation of impression removal force with elastomeric impression material rigidity and hardness. Walker MP; Alderman N; Petrie CS; Melander J; McGuire J J Prosthodont; 2013 Jul; 22(5):362-6. PubMed ID: 23387301 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Dimensional stability and detail reproduction of irreversible hydrocolloid and elastomeric impressions disinfected by immersion. Johnson GH; Chellis KD; Gordon GE; Lepe X J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Apr; 79(4):446-53. PubMed ID: 9576321 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Comparison of elastomeric impression materials used in fixed prosthodontics. Ciesco JN; Malone WF; Sandrik JL; Mazur B J Prosthet Dent; 1981 Jan; 45(1):89-94. PubMed ID: 7007629 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]