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 *

243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9685767)

  • 21. Preparation of void-free casts from vinyl polysiloxane impressions.
    Sherfudhin H; Abdulla MA
    J Dent; 1996; 24(1-2):95-8. PubMed ID: 8636501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effect of surfactant on surface hardness of dental stone and investment casts produced from polyvinyl siloxane duplicating materials.
    Al-Johani A; Clark RK; Juszczyk AS; Radford DR
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2008 Jun; 16(2):77-80. PubMed ID: 18637383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Effect of different impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of impressions using various elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study.
    Singh K; Sahoo S; Prasad KD; Goel M; Singh A
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jan; 13(1):98-106. PubMed ID: 22430701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Reproducibility of sterilized rubber impressions.
    Abdelaziz KM; Hassan AM; Hodges JS
    Braz Dent J; 2004; 15(3):209-13. PubMed ID: 15798825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effect of tray space on the accuracy of monophasic polyvinylsiloxane impressions.
    Tjan AH; Nemetz H; Nguyen LT; Contino R
    J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Jul; 68(1):19-28. PubMed ID: 1403906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effect of measurement site on the dimensional accuracy of die-forming materials and techniques.
    Petrie CS; Walker MP; Theodotou N; Glaros AG; Williams K
    Gen Dent; 2004; 52(3):228-32. PubMed ID: 15206253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The influence of five impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of master models.
    Fenske C
    Braz Dent J; 2000; 11(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 11210270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Mastering the impression technique for simple to complex treatments.
    Paquette JM; Sheets CG
    Dent Today; 2000 Jun; 19(6):68-75. PubMed ID: 12524795
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparative adaptation accuracy of acrylic denture bases evaluated by two different methods.
    Lee CJ; Bok SB; Bae JY; Lee HH
    Dent Mater J; 2010 Aug; 29(4):411-7. PubMed ID: 20675954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Volatilization of components from and water absorption of polyether impressions.
    Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Endo T
    J Dent; 2006 Feb; 34(2):134-8. PubMed ID: 16150526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of dimensional accuracy of four different die materials before and after disinfection of the impression: an in vitro study.
    Nandini Y; Vinitha KB; Manvi S; Smitha M
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jul; 14(4):668-74. PubMed ID: 24309347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effects of a chemical disinfectant on the physical properties of dental stones.
    Hall BD; Muñoz-Viveros CA; Naylor WP; Sy J
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):65-71. PubMed ID: 15008235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Working time of elastomeric impression materials: relevance of rheological tests.
    Balkenhol M; Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Wöstmann B
    Am J Dent; 2007 Dec; 20(6):347-52. PubMed ID: 18269123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.