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 *

485 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12066659)

  • 21. A clinical evaluation of adhesively luted ceramic inlays. A two year follow-up study.
    Höglund C; van Dijken J; Olofsson AL
    Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(4):169-71. PubMed ID: 1455328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Dentin bond strengths of two ceramic inlay systems after cementation with three different techniques and one bonding system.
    Ozturk N; Aykent F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):275-81. PubMed ID: 12644803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Fracture resistance of resin-based composite and ceramic inlays luted to sound human teeth.
    da Silva SB; Hilgert LA; Busato AL
    Am J Dent; 2004 Dec; 17(6):404-6. PubMed ID: 15724750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Short-term clinical evaluation of inlay and onlay restorations made with a ceromer.
    Monaco C; Baldissara P; dall'Orologio GD; Scotti R
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(1):81-6. PubMed ID: 11842911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays after six years: wear of luting composites.
    Krämer N; Frankenberger R
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):466-72. PubMed ID: 11203858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Influence of material selection on the risk of inlay fracture during pre-cementation functional occlusal tapping.
    Magne P; Paranhos MP; Schlichting LH
    Dent Mater; 2011 Feb; 27(2):109-13. PubMed ID: 20934744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Four-year clinical performance and marginal analysis of pressed glass ceramic inlays luted with ormocer restorative vs. conventional luting composite.
    Krämer N; Reinelt C; Richter G; Frankenberger R
    J Dent; 2009 Nov; 37(11):813-9. PubMed ID: 19744761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Luting composite thickness of two ceramic inlay systems.
    Sertgöz A; Gemalmaz D; Alkumru H; Yoruç B
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1995 Jun; 3(4):151-4. PubMed ID: 8601157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effect of mouth-motion fatigue and thermal cycling on the marginal accuracy of partial coverage restorations made of various dental materials.
    Stappert CF; Chitmongkolsuk S; Silva NR; Att W; Strub JR
    Dent Mater; 2008 Sep; 24(9):1248-57. PubMed ID: 18395785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Clinical and semiquantitative marginal analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Inokoshi S; Willems G; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    J Dent; 1995 Dec; 23(6):329-38. PubMed ID: 8530722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Marginal integrity after fatigue loading of ceramic inlay restorations luted with three different cements.
    Abdalla AI; Davidson CL
    Am J Dent; 2000 Apr; 13(2):77-80. PubMed ID: 11764831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Computer-designed inlays after 5 years in situ: clinical performance and scanning electron microscopic evaluation.
    Mörmann W; Krejci I
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Feb; 23(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 1641451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Fracture load of composite resin and feldspathic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns.
    Attia A; Abdelaziz KM; Freitag S; Kern M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Feb; 95(2):117-23. PubMed ID: 16473085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A prospective clinical study of ceromer inlays: results up to 53 months.
    Kükrer D; Gemalmaz D; Kuybulu EO; Bozkurt FO
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):17-23. PubMed ID: 15008227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. All-ceramic partial coverage restorations--midterm results of a 5-year prospective clinical splitmouth study.
    Guess PC; Strub JR; Steinhart N; Wolkewitz M; Stappert CF
    J Dent; 2009 Aug; 37(8):627-37. PubMed ID: 19477570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Marginal adaptation of indirect composites and ceramic inlay systems.
    Soares CJ; Martins LR; Fernandes Neto AJ; Giannini M
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(6):689-94. PubMed ID: 14653281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical evaluation of indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays over a 24-month period.
    Kaytan B; Onal B; Pamir T; Tezel H
    Gen Dent; 2005; 53(5):329-34. PubMed ID: 16252535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Three-year clinical evaluation of composite and ceramic inlays.
    Manhart J; Chen HY; Neuerer P; Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A; Hickel R
    Am J Dent; 2001 Apr; 14(2):95-9. PubMed ID: 11507807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A retrospective study of Mirage ceramic inlays over up to 9 years.
    Schulz P; Johansson A; Arvidson K
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(5):510-4. PubMed ID: 14651236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Clinical long-term evaluation and failure characteristics of 1,335 all-ceramic restorations.
    Beier US; Kapferer I; Dumfahrt H
    Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(1):70-8. PubMed ID: 22259801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 25.