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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11323865)

  • 1. Properties of packable dental composites.
    Choi KK; Ferracane JL; Hilton TJ; Charlton D
    J Esthet Dent; 2000; 12(4):216-26. PubMed ID: 11323865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites: a comparison.
    Cobb DS; MacGregor KM; Vargas MA; Denehy GE
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2000 Nov; 131(11):1610-5. PubMed ID: 11103581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Fracture toughness of posterior resin composites.
    Bonilla ED; Mardirossian G; Caputo AA
    Quintessence Int; 2001 Mar; 32(3):206-10. PubMed ID: 12066660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fracture toughness of packable and conventional composite materials.
    Knobloch LA; Kerby RE; Seghi R; Berlin JS; Clelland N
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):307-13. PubMed ID: 12426502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Physical properties of three packable resin-composite restorative materials.
    Kelsey WP; Latta MA; Shaddy RS; Stanislav CM
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):331-5. PubMed ID: 11203839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro wear of packable dental composites.
    Ferracane JL; Choi KK; Condon JR
    Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl; 1999; (25):S60-6; quiz S74. PubMed ID: 11908398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The suitability of packable resin-based composites for posterior restorations.
    Manhart J; Chen HY; Hickel R
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 May; 132(5):639-45. PubMed ID: 11367968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of filler loading and morphology on the mechanical properties of contemporary composites.
    Kim KH; Ong JL; Okuno O
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jun; 87(6):642-9. PubMed ID: 12131887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Hardness and degree of conversion of posterior packable composites.
    Knobloch L; Kerby RE; Clelland N; Lee J
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(6):642-9. PubMed ID: 15646219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Does the wear resistance of packable composite equal that of dental amalgam?
    Suzuki S
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2004; 16(6):355-65; discussion 365-7. PubMed ID: 15801341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Influence of shade and storage time on the flexural strength, flexural modulus, and hardness of composites used for indirect restorations.
    Cesar PF; Miranda WG; Braga RR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):289-96. PubMed ID: 11552166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Wear resistance of packable resin composites after simulated toothbrushing test.
    Wang L; Garcia FC; Amarante de Araújo P; Franco EB; Mondelli RF
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2004; 16(5):303-14; discussion 314-5. PubMed ID: 15726799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of packable composites.
    Herrero AA; Yaman P; Dennison JB
    Quintessence Int; 2005 Jan; 36(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 15709494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology.
    Ilie N; Hickel R
    Dent Mater; 2011 Apr; 27(4):348-55. PubMed ID: 21194743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Microleakage of Class II packable resin composites lined with flowables: an in vitro study.
    Neme AM; Maxson BB; Pink FE; Aksu MN
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(6):600-5. PubMed ID: 12413226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Polymerization shrinkage of densely-filled resin composites.
    Aw TC; Nicholls JI
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(5):498-504. PubMed ID: 11551015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The influence of a packable resin composite, conventional resin composite and amalgam on molar cuspal stiffness.
    Molinaro JD; Diefenderfer KE; Strother JM
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(5):516-24. PubMed ID: 12216572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light-cured packable composite resins.
    Manhart J; Kunzelmann KH; Chen HY; Hickel R
    Dent Mater; 2000 Jan; 16(1):33-40. PubMed ID: 11203521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparative physico-mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    J Dent Res; 1997 Apr; 76(4):883-94. PubMed ID: 9126185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Simulated oral wear of packable composites.
    Clelland NL; Villarroel SC; Knobloch LA; Seghi RR
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(6):830-7. PubMed ID: 14653301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.