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 *

212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10680384)

  • 1. Causes of failure among cuspal-coverage amalgam restorations: a clinical survey.
    McDaniel RJ; Davis RD; Murchison DF; Cohen RB
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2000 Feb; 131(2):173-7. PubMed ID: 10680384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cuspal reinforcement in endodontically treated molars.
    Uyehara MY; Davis RD; Overton JD
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(6):364-70. PubMed ID: 10823086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A study of primary teeth restored by intracoronal restorations in children participating in an undergraduate teaching programme at Cork University Dental School and Hospital, Ireland.
    Hurley E; Da Mata C; Stewart C; Kinirons M
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2015 Mar; 16(1):78-82. PubMed ID: 25793959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in posterior teeth of young Finnish adults.
    Palotie U; Vehkalahti M
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2002 Dec; 60(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12512880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reasons for placement and replacement of amalgam restorations in Jordan.
    Al Negrish AR
    Int Dent J; 2001 Apr; 51(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 11569662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations.
    Deliperi S; Bardwell DN
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2006; 18(5):256-65; discussion 266-7. PubMed ID: 16987320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Long-term evaluation and rerestoration of amalgam restorations.
    Akerboom HB; Advokaat JG; Van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1993 Feb; 21(1):45-8. PubMed ID: 8432106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Factors influencing dentists' choice of amalgam and tooth-colored restorative materials for Class II preparations in younger patients.
    Vidnes-Kopperud S; Tveit AB; Gaarden T; Sandvik L; Espelid I
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2009; 67(2):74-9. PubMed ID: 19085213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Placement and replacement rates of amalgam and composite restorations on posterior teeth in a military population.
    Owen BD; Guevara PH; Greenwood W
    US Army Med Dep J; 2017; (2-17):88-94. PubMed ID: 28853125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Restoration of noncarious tooth defects by dentists in The Dental Practice-Based Research Network.
    Nascimento MM; Gordan VV; Qvist V; Bader JD; Rindal DB; Williams OD; Gewartowski D; Fellows JL; Litaker MS; Gilbert GH;
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2011 Dec; 142(12):1368-75. PubMed ID: 22130438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An evaluation of replacement rates for posterior resin-based composite and amalgam restorations in U.S. Navy and marine corps recruits.
    Simecek JW; Diefenderfer KE; Cohen ME
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Feb; 140(2):200-9; quiz 249. PubMed ID: 19188417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial.
    Bernardo M; Luis H; Martin MD; Leroux BG; Rue T; Leitão J; DeRouen TA
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2007 Jun; 138(6):775-83. PubMed ID: 17545266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An audit on the placement and replacement of restorations in a general dental practice.
    Frost PM
    Prim Dent Care; 2002 Jan; 9(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 11901789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Fracture resistance of defective amalgam restorations repaired with a resin-based composite material.
    Hopkins CE; Restrepo-Kennedy N; Elgreatly A; Comnick C; Vargas M; Teixeira EC
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2023 Feb; 154(2):141-150. PubMed ID: 36543651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation and treatment of failed amalgam restorations at Ibadan, Nigeria.
    Ajayi DM; Abiodun-Solanke IM; Arigbede AO
    West Afr J Med; 2013; 32(4):248-53. PubMed ID: 24488277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Class II amalgam restorations, glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: a 3-year clinical study.
    Svanberg M
    Caries Res; 1992; 26(4):315-8. PubMed ID: 1423449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation.
    Palotie U; Eronen AK; Vehkalahti K; Vehkalahti MM
    J Dent; 2017 Jul; 62():13-17. PubMed ID: 28529175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings From the New England Children's Amalgam Trial.
    Soncini JA; Maserejian NN; Trachtenberg F; Tavares M; Hayes C
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2007 Jun; 138(6):763-72. PubMed ID: 17545265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Adhesively bonded versus non-bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries.
    Fedorowicz Z; Nasser M; Wilson N
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2009 Oct; (4):CD007517. PubMed ID: 19821423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.