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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8933434)

  • 1. The effect of marginal thickness on the distortion of different impression materials.
    Laufer BZ; Baharav H; Ganor Y; Cardash HS
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Nov; 76(5):466-71. PubMed ID: 8933434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effect of sulcular width on the linear accuracy of impression materials in the presence of an undercut.
    Baharav H; Kupershmidt I; Laufer BZ; Cardash HS
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(5):585-9. PubMed ID: 15543916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Gingival sulcus simulation model for evaluating the penetration characteristics of elastomeric impression materials.
    Aimjirakul P; Masuda T; Takahashi H; Miura H
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(4):385-9. PubMed ID: 12956493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The linear accuracy of impressions and stone dies as affected by the thickness of the impression margin.
    Laufer BZ; Baharav H; Cardash HS
    Int J Prosthodont; 1994; 7(3):247-52. PubMed ID: 7916890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane impression material reproducing the sulcular area.
    Levartovsky S; Levy G; Brosh T; Harel N; Ganor Y; Pilo R
    Dent Mater J; 2013; 32(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 23370867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of one-step vs. two-step impression techniques on long-term accuracy and dimensional stability when the finish line is within the gingival sulcular area.
    Levartovsky S; Zalis M; Pilo R; Harel N; Ganor Y; Brosh T
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Feb; 23(2):124-33. PubMed ID: 23734561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study.
    Lee H; Ercoli C; Funkenbusch PD; Feng C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):107-13. PubMed ID: 18262011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Margin adaptation of indirect composite inlays fabricated on flexible dies.
    Price RB; Gerrow JD
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):306-13. PubMed ID: 10709039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Sulcus depth reproduction with polyvinyl siloxane impression material: effects of hydrophilicity and impression temperature.
    Takahashi H; Finger WJ; Kurokawa R; Furukawa M; Komatsu M
    Quintessence Int; 2010 Mar; 41(3):e43-50. PubMed ID: 20213014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions.
    Wee AG
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):323-31. PubMed ID: 10709042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Casting ability of selected impression materials tested in different conditions in an in vitro sulcus model.
    Kolbeck C; Rosentritt M; Lang R; Schiller M; Handel G
    Quintessence Int; 2009 Oct; 40(9):e62-8. PubMed ID: 19862391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of the impression margin thickness on the linear accuracy of impression and stone dies: an in vitro study.
    Naveen YG; Patil R
    J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2013 Mar; 13(1):13-8. PubMed ID: 24431701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of temperature changes on the dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane and polyether impression materials.
    Corso M; Abanomy A; Di Canzio J; Zurakowski D; Morgano SM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Jun; 79(6):626-31. PubMed ID: 9627890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of chemical disinfectant solutions on the stability and accuracy of the dental impression complex.
    Rios MP; Morgano SM; Stein RS; Rose L
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Oct; 76(4):356-62. PubMed ID: 8897290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of surface moisture on detail reproduction of elastomeric impressions.
    Johnson GH; Lepe X; Aw TC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Oct; 90(4):354-64. PubMed ID: 14564290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting.
    Berg JC; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Adán-Plaza S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):150-61. PubMed ID: 12886208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.