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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11324083)

  • 1. Amalgam substitutes: a critical analysis.
    Lutz F; Krejci I
    J Esthet Dent; 2000; 12(3):146-59. PubMed ID: 11324083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Linear displacement and force induced by polymerization shrinkage of resin-based restorative materials.
    Stavridakis MM; Lutz F; Johnston WM; Krejci I
    Am J Dent; 2003 Dec; 16(6):431-8. PubMed ID: 15002960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of resin-based material combination on the compressive and the flexural strength.
    Gömeç Y; Dörter C; Dabanoglu A; Koray F
    J Oral Rehabil; 2005 Feb; 32(2):122-7. PubMed ID: 15641978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Resin composites in the post-amalgam age.
    Lutz F; Krejci I
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 1999 Dec; 20(12):1138-44, 1146, 1148. PubMed ID: 10850266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Laboratory evaluation of compomers in Class V restorations.
    Chersoni S; Lorenzi R; Ferrieri P; Prati C
    Am J Dent; 1997 Jun; 10(3):147-51. PubMed ID: 9545890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Marginal integrity of large compomer Class II restorations with cervical margins in dentine.
    Dietrich T; Kraemer M; Lösche GM; Roulet J
    J Dent; 2000 Aug; 28(6):399-405. PubMed ID: 10856804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dyract versus Tytin Class II restorations in primary molars: 36 months evaluation.
    Marks LA; Weerheijm KL; van Amerongen WE; Groen HJ; Martens LC
    Caries Res; 1999; 33(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 10460963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Composite polymers--an amalgam substitute for deciduous tooth cavities?].
    Krejci I; Gebauer L; Häusler T; Lutz F
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1994; 104(6):724-30. PubMed ID: 8042022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Marginal adaptation of compomers in Class I and V cavities in primary molars.
    el-Kalla IH
    Am J Dent; 1999 Feb; 12(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 10477997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of two different restorative techniques using resin-based composites on microleakage.
    Aranha AC; Pimenta LA
    Am J Dent; 2004 Apr; 17(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 15151335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Compomers adaptation to Class I and V cavities in permanent teeth.
    el-Kalla IH; García-Godoy F
    ASDC J Dent Child; 2000; 67(1):29-36, 8. PubMed ID: 10736655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Resin-based composites and compomers in primary molars.
    García-Godoy F
    Dent Clin North Am; 2000 Jul; 44(3):541-70. PubMed ID: 10925772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Marginal integrity of different resin-based composites for posterior teeth: an in vitro dye-penetration study on eight resin-composite and compomer-/adhesive combinations with a particular look at the additional use of flow-composites.
    Ernst CP; Cortain G; Spohn M; Rippin G; Willershausen B
    Dent Mater; 2002 Jun; 18(4):351-8. PubMed ID: 11992914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
    Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
    J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The color differences between different thicknesses of resin veneered over amalgam.
    Al-Jazairy YH; El-Hejazi AA
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2005 Nov; 6(4):38-45. PubMed ID: 16299605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Compressive strength, fluoride release and recharge of fluoride-releasing materials.
    Xu X; Burgess JO
    Biomaterials; 2003 Jun; 24(14):2451-61. PubMed ID: 12695072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in small to moderate-sized Class II preparations of conventional design.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2000 May; 31(5):347-52. PubMed ID: 11203946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.