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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11800440)

  • 1. Effect of surface treatment on fatigue behaviour between Tetric Ceram inlays and Variolink luting composite.
    Frankenberger R; Strobel WO; Baresel J; Trapper T; Krämer N; Petschelt A
    Clin Oral Investig; 2001 Dec; 5(4):260-5. PubMed ID: 11800440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Analysis of marginal adaptation and sealing to enamel and dentin of four self-adhesive resin cements.
    Aschenbrenner CM; Lang R; Handel G; Behr M
    Clin Oral Investig; 2012 Feb; 16(1):191-200. PubMed ID: 21327799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bonding Effectiveness of Luting Composites to Different CAD/CAM Materials.
    Peumans M; Valjakova EB; De Munck J; Mishevska CB; Van Meerbeek B
    J Adhes Dent; 2016; 18(4):289-302. PubMed ID: 27222889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaptation: direct composite resins vs ceramic inlays.
    Frankenberger R; Sindel J; Krämer N; Petschelt A
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):147-55. PubMed ID: 10530276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Fatigue behavior of the resin-resin bond of partially replaced resin-based composite restorations.
    Frankenberger R; Krämer N; Ebert J; Lohbauer U; Käppel S; ten Weges S; Petschelt A
    Am J Dent; 2003 Feb; 16(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 12744407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of resin composite inlays in vitro.
    Roggendorf MJ; Krämer N; Dippold C; Vosen VE; Naumann M; Jablonski-Momeni A; Frankenberger R
    J Dent; 2012 Dec; 40(12):1068-73. PubMed ID: 22960537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Luting of ceramic inlays in vitro: marginal quality of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives versus self-etch cements.
    Frankenberger R; Lohbauer U; Schaible RB; Nikolaenko SA; Naumann M
    Dent Mater; 2008 Feb; 24(2):185-91. PubMed ID: 17544101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bonding of restorative materials to dentin with various luting agents.
    Peutzfeldt A; Sahafi A; Flury S
    Oper Dent; 2011; 36(3):266-73. PubMed ID: 21740244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of different surface pre-treatments and luting materials on shear bond strength to PEEK.
    Schmidlin PR; Stawarczyk B; Wieland M; Attin T; Hämmerle CH; Fischer J
    Dent Mater; 2010 Jun; 26(6):553-9. PubMed ID: 20206986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of ceramic inlays in vitro.
    Frankenberger R; Hehn J; Hajtó J; Krämer N; Naumann M; Koch A; Roggendorf MJ
    Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Jan; 17(1):177-83. PubMed ID: 22358378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors affecting the shear bond strength of bonded composite inlays.
    Nilsson E; Alaeddin S; Karlsson S; Milleding P; Wennerberg A
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 11203610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of surface preparation on bond strength of resin luting cements to dentin.
    Peerzada F; Yiu CK; Hiraishi N; Tay FR; King NM
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):624-33. PubMed ID: 21180001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of different surface treatments on bond strength between leucite reinforced feldspathic ceramic and composite resin.
    Fabianelli A; Pollington S; Papacchini F; Goracci C; Cantoro A; Ferrari M; van Noort R
    J Dent; 2010 Jan; 38(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 19744537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Physical properties of dual-cured luting-agents correlated to early no interfacial-gap incidence with composite inlay restorations.
    Irie M; Maruo Y; Nishigawa G; Suzuki K; Watts DC
    Dent Mater; 2010 Jun; 26(6):608-15. PubMed ID: 20334906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bond strength of luting cements to zirconium oxide ceramics.
    Dérand P; Dérand T
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(2):131-5. PubMed ID: 11203621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of resin cement viscosity on microleakage of ceramic inlays.
    Hahn P; Attin T; Gröfke M; Hellwig E
    Dent Mater; 2001 May; 17(3):191-6. PubMed ID: 11257290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of proximal box elevation technique on marginal integrity of adhesively luted Cerec inlays.
    Müller V; Friedl KH; Friedl K; Hahnel S; Handel G; Lang R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Mar; 21(2):607-612. PubMed ID: 27507168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Interfacial fracture toughness of different resin cements bonded to a lithium disilicate glass ceramic.
    Hooshmand T; Rostami G; Behroozibakhsh M; Fatemi M; Keshvad A; van Noort R
    J Dent; 2012 Feb; 40(2):139-45. PubMed ID: 22182467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations.
    Krämer N; Lohbauer U; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):60D-76D. PubMed ID: 11763920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of different luting materials on the marginal adaptation of Class I ceramic inlay restorations in vitro.
    Bott B; Hannig M
    Dent Mater; 2003 Jun; 19(4):264-9. PubMed ID: 12686289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.