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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9581358)

  • 21. Bond strength of two nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials bonded to two thermoplastic resin tray materials.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Dec; 74(6):563-8. PubMed ID: 8778378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [The bonding properties of various silicone impression materials at standardized surfaces using adhesives].
    Morneburg T
    Dtsch Stomatol (1990); 1991; 41(8):306-8. PubMed ID: 1816858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of tray selection on the accuracy of elastomeric impression materials.
    Gordon GE; Johnson GH; Drennon DG
    J Prosthet Dent; 1990 Jan; 63(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 2404101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Tissue stops aid in improving accuracy of impressions.
    Moon MG; Holmes RG
    J Prosthet Dent; 1997 May; 77(5):557. PubMed ID: 9151281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Crown and bridge impressions--a comparison between the UK and a number of other countries.
    Winstanley RB
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1999; 7(2):61-4. PubMed ID: 10865382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effect of disinfecting alginate and addition cured silicone rubber impression materials on the physical properties of impressions and resultant casts.
    al-Omari WM; Jones JC; Wood DJ
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1998 Sep; 6(3):103-10. PubMed ID: 10218014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Bond strength of three nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials to a light-activated resin tray.
    Payne JA; Pereira BP
    Int J Prosthodont; 1992; 5(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 1520444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. The influence of impression trays on the accuracy of stone casts poured from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions.
    Mendez AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 1985 Sep; 54(3):383-8. PubMed ID: 3906093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Accuracy of one-step versus two-step putty wash addition silicone impression technique.
    Hung SH; Purk JH; Tira DE; Eick JD
    J Prosthet Dent; 1992 May; 67(5):583-9. PubMed ID: 1527737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effect of loading and syringing on void formation in automixed addition silicone elastomers.
    Chong YH; Soh G; Lim KC
    J Oral Rehabil; 1993 Nov; 20(6):631-6. PubMed ID: 10412486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Comparison of the dimensional accuracy of one- and two-step techniques with the use of putty/wash addition silicone impression materials.
    Idris B; Houston F; Claffey N
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Nov; 74(5):535-41. PubMed ID: 8809262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Predictable elastomeric impressions in advanced fixed prosthodontics: a comprehensive review.
    Lee EA
    Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent; 1999 May; 11(4):497-504; quiz 506. PubMed ID: 10635238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. In vitro study of the number of surface defects in monophase and two-phase addition silicone impressions.
    Millar BJ; Dunne SM; Robinson PB
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Jul; 80(1):32-5. PubMed ID: 9656175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Impression trifecta: three tools and tips for better impressions.
    Gottlieb M; Fagin M
    Todays FDA; 2011; 23(3):57-61. PubMed ID: 21568211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Experimental study on the use of spacer foils in two-step putty and wash impression procedures using silicone impression materials.
    Mann K; Davids A; Range U; Richter G; Boening K; Reitemeier B
    J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Apr; 113(4):316-22. PubMed ID: 25453563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.