BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

887 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10570589)

  • 1. Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations.
    Donly KJ; Segura A; Kanellis M; Erickson RL
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1999 Oct; 130(10):1459-66. PubMed ID: 10570589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials.
    Lai GY; Zhu LK; Li MY; Wang J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):363-8. PubMed ID: 23998624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations in primary teeth. A retrospective evaluation.
    Croll TP; Bar-Zion Y; Segura A; Donly KJ
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 Aug; 132(8):1110-6. PubMed ID: 11575018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Lack of effect of fluoride releasing resin modified glass ionomer restorations on the contacting surface of adjacent primary molars. a clinical prospective study.
    Kotsanos N; Dionysopoulos P
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2004 Sep; 5(3):136-42. PubMed ID: 15471520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on adjacent interproximal caries.
    Donly KJ; Segura A; Wefel JS; Hogan MM
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1999 Jun; 130(6):817-25. PubMed ID: 10377639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Fluoride release and caries inhibition associated with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement at varying fluoride loading doses.
    Donly KJ; Segura A
    Am J Dent; 2002 Feb; 15(1):8-10. PubMed ID: 12074234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Two-year clinical evaluation of three restorative materials in primary molars.
    Daou MH; Tavernier B; Meyer JM
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2009; 34(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 19953810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Enamel remineralization on teeth adjacent to Class II glass ionomer restorations.
    Segura A; Donly KJ; Stratmann RG
    Am J Dent; 1997 Oct; 10(5):247-50. PubMed ID: 9522700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Longevity of extensive class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement.
    van Dijken JW; Kieri C; Carlén M
    J Dent Res; 1999 Jul; 78(7):1319-25. PubMed ID: 10403459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of a resin-modified glass ionomer restorative material on artificially demineralised dentine caries in vitro.
    Creanor SL; Awawdeh LA; Saunders WP; Foye RH; Gilmour WH
    J Dent; 1998; 26(5-6):527-31. PubMed ID: 9699447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An in vitro investigation of marginal dentine caries abutting composite resin and glass ionomer cement restorations.
    Knight GM; McIntyre JM; Craig GG; Mulyani ; Zilm PS; Gully NJ
    Aust Dent J; 2007 Sep; 52(3):187-92. PubMed ID: 17969286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation.
    Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G
    Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Retrospective Study of the 3-Year Survival Rate of Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Class II Restorations in Primary Molars.
    Webman M; Mulki E; Roldan R; Arevalo O; Roberts JF; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2016; 40(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 26696100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Demineralization inhibition at glass-ionomer cement and amalgam restoration margins in conjunction with additional fluoride regimens.
    Donly KJ; Kerber L
    Spec Care Dentist; 1999; 19(1):24-8. PubMed ID: 10483457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Glass ionomer cement inhibits secondary caries in an in vitro biofilm model.
    Krämer N; Schmidt M; Lücker S; Domann E; Frankenberger R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Mar; 22(2):1019-1031. PubMed ID: 28741172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth: three-year results.
    Qvist V; Laurberg L; Poulsen A; Teglers PT
    J Dent Res; 1997 Jul; 76(7):1387-96. PubMed ID: 9207772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Conventional versus resin-modified glass-ionomer cement for Class II restorations in primary molars. A 3-year clinical study.
    Hübel S; Mejàre I
    Int J Paediatr Dent; 2003 Jan; 13(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 12542617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RM GICs) implications for use in pediatric dentistry.
    Vaikuntam J
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1997; 64(2):131-4. PubMed ID: 9189004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Secondary caries formation in vitro around fluoride-releasing restorations.
    Dionysopoulos P; Kotsanos N; Koliniotou-Koubia ; Papagodiannis Y
    Oper Dent; 1994; 19(5):183-8. PubMed ID: 8700758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 45.