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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1059657)

  • 41. [The future of dental amalgam].
    Opdam NJ
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2005 Oct; 112(10):373-5. PubMed ID: 16300323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Shear bond strength of the amalgam-resin composite interface.
    Machado C; Sanchez E; Alapati S; Seghi R; Johnston W
    Oper Dent; 2007; 32(4):341-6. PubMed ID: 17695606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Effect of an adhesive bonding system on wear resistance of resin composite restorations.
    Shinkai K; Suzuki S; Katoh Y
    Quintessence Int; 1997 Oct; 28(10):687-93. PubMed ID: 9477890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Shear bond strength of brackets bonded to amalgam with different intermediate resins and adhesives.
    Germec D; Cakan U; Ozdemir FI; Arun T; Cakan M
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Apr; 31(2):207-12. PubMed ID: 19073953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Do restorations made of amalgam outlast those made of resin-based composite?
    Leinfelder KF
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2000 Aug; 131(8):1186-7. PubMed ID: 10953536
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Comparison of wear and clinical performance between amalgam, composite and open sandwich restorations: 2-year results.
    Sachdeo A; Gray GB; Sulieman MA; Jagger DC
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2004 Mar; 12(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 15058177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The effect of surface conditioning on the bond strength of resin composite to amalgam.
    Blum IR; Hafiana K; Curtis A; Barbour ME; Attin T; Lynch CD; Jagger DC
    J Dent; 2012 Jan; 40(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 22100436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Assessing microleakage at the junction between amalgam and composite resin: a new method in vitro.
    Hadavi F; Hey JH; Ambrose ER
    Oper Dent; 1991; 16(1):6-12. PubMed ID: 1784538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Wear of composite resin veneering materials and enamel in a chewing simulator.
    Mehl C; Scheibner S; Ludwig K; Kern M
    Dent Mater; 2007 Nov; 23(11):1382-9. PubMed ID: 17210173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Clinical evaluation of composite resin and amalgam posterior restorations: two year results.
    Derkson GD; Richardson AS; Waldman R
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1983 Apr; 49(4):277-9. PubMed ID: 6344966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Wear properties of a novel resin composite compared to human enamel and other restorative materials.
    D'Arcangelo C; Vanini L; Rondoni GD; Pirani M; Vadini M; Gattone M; De Angelis F
    Oper Dent; 2014; 39(6):612-8. PubMed ID: 25084103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. The composite resin restoration: a literature review, Part III. What the future holds.
    Full CA; Hollander WR
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):57-9. PubMed ID: 8432949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. In vitro quantitative assessment of generalized wear of dental composites.
    Kawai K; Tsuchitani Y
    J Osaka Univ Dent Sch; 1994 Dec; 34():9-18. PubMed ID: 8935089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Shear bond strength of composite resin and amalgam adhesive systems to dentin.
    Evans DB; Neme AM
    Am J Dent; 1999 Feb; 12(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 10477994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. [Bond strength of etched enamel to direct composite resins, to indirect composite resins and to etched and silanized porcelain].
    Prévost AP; Desautels P
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1990 Jul; 56(7):631-5. PubMed ID: 2204471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. In situ effect of an erosive challenge on different restorative materials and on enamel adjacent to these materials.
    Rios D; Honório HM; Francisconi LF; Magalhães AC; de Andrade Moreira Machado MA; Buzalaf MA
    J Dent; 2008 Feb; 36(2):152-7. PubMed ID: 18191012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Clinical evaluation of composite resin and amalgam posterior restorations: three year results.
    Derkson GD; Richardson AS; Waldman R
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1984 Jun; 50(6):478-80. PubMed ID: 6378338
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Wear of feldspathic ceramic, nano-filled composite resin and acrylic resin artificial teeth when opposed to different antagonists.
    Ghazal M; Hedderich J; Kern M
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2008 Dec; 116(6):585-92. PubMed ID: 19049531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The influence of long term water immersion on shear bond strength of amalgam repaired by resin composite and mediated by adhesives or resin modified glass ionomers.
    Pilo R; Nissan J; Shafir H; Shapira G; Alter E; Brosh T
    J Dent; 2012 Jul; 40(7):594-602. PubMed ID: 22504527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.