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 *

524 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11572292)

  • 21. Randomized clinical trial of adhesive restorations in primary molars. 18-month results.
    Casagrande L; Dalpian DM; Ardenghi TM; Zanatta FB; Balbinot CE; García-Godoy F; De Araujo FB
    Am J Dent; 2013 Dec; 26(6):351-5. PubMed ID: 24640441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
    Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations.
    Wucher M; Grobler SR; Senekal PJ
    Am J Dent; 2002 Aug; 15(4):274-8. PubMed ID: 12572648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Clinical performance of posterior compomer restorations over 4 years.
    Krämer N; García-Godoy F; Reinelt C; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2006 Feb; 19(1):61-6. PubMed ID: 16555660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material.
    Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Brackett MG
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 11203770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Clinical performance and SEM evaluation of direct composite restorations in primary molars.
    Puppin-Rontani RM; de Góes MF; Voelske CE; García-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2006 Oct; 19(5):255-61. PubMed ID: 17073199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Flowable resin composite as a class II restorative in primary molars: A two-year clinical evaluation.
    Andersson-Wenckert I; Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2006 Nov; 64(6):334-40. PubMed ID: 17123909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Survival of self-etch adhesive Class II composite restorations using ART and conventional cavity preparations in primary molars.
    Eden E; Topaloglu-Ak A; Frencken JE; van't Hof M
    Am J Dent; 2006 Dec; 19(6):359-63. PubMed ID: 17212078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.
    Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; Chimello DT; Palma-Dibb RG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 31(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 15025658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite in class V carious lesions: 3-year results.
    Demirci M; Ersev H; Topçubaşi M; Uçok M
    Dent Mater J; 2005 Sep; 24(3):321-7. PubMed ID: 16279721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparative clinical evaluation of different treatment approaches using a microfilled resin composite and a compomer in Class III cavities: two-year results.
    Demirci M; Yildiz E; Uysal O
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(1):7-14. PubMed ID: 18335727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 1-year clinical evaluation of Compoglass and Fuji II LC in cervical erosion/abfraction lesions.
    Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Gregory PN; Owens BM
    Am J Dent; 1999 Jun; 12(3):119-22. PubMed ID: 10649933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Microleakage of Class II composite restorations.
    Wibowo G; Stockton L
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):177-85. PubMed ID: 11572297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evidence-based assessment of tooth-colored restorations in proximal lesions of primary molars.
    Toh SL; Messer LB
    Pediatr Dent; 2007; 29(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 18041507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations.
    van Dijken JW
    Am J Dent; 1996 Oct; 9(5):195-8. PubMed ID: 9545903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions.
    van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
    Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):915-22. PubMed ID: 18155288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
    Shi L; Wang X; Zhao Q; Zhang Y; Zhang L; Ren Y; Chen Z
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 20166406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 27.