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 *

262 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12615024)

  • 1. Fracture resistance of class II preformed ceramic insert and direct composite resin restorations.
    Görücü J
    J Dent; 2003 Jan; 31(1):83-8. PubMed ID: 12615024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: an in vitro study.
    Desai PD; Das UK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):877. PubMed ID: 22484893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of different restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated molars.
    Cobankara FK; Unlu N; Cetin AR; Ozkan HB
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):526-33. PubMed ID: 18833859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations.
    Shor A; Nicholls JI; Phillips KM; Libman WJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 12675458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with extensive composite resin restorations.
    Plotino G; Buono L; Grande NM; Lamorgese V; Somma F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Mar; 99(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 18319094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
    Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
    Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influence of cavity design and restorative material on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars.
    Cubas GB; Camacho GB; Pereira-Cenci T; Nonaka T; Barbin EL
    Gen Dent; 2010; 58(2):e84-8. PubMed ID: 20236909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A comparison of stresses in molar teeth restored with inlays and direct restorations, including polymerization shrinkage of composite resin and tooth loading during mastication.
    Dejak B; Młotkowski A
    Dent Mater; 2015 Mar; 31(3):e77-87. PubMed ID: 25544104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of oxalate desensitizer with different resin cement-retained indirect composite inlays on fracture resistance of teeth.
    Shafiei F; Alavi AA; Karimi F; Ansarifard E
    J Prosthodont; 2013 Jun; 22(4):268-74. PubMed ID: 23279061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with indirect-composite and ceramic inlay systems.
    Soares CJ; Martins LR; Pfeifer JM; Giannini M
    Quintessence Int; 2004 Apr; 35(4):281-6. PubMed ID: 15119713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In vitro study of enamel and dentin marginal integrity of composite and compomer restorations placed in primary teeth after diamond or Er:YAG laser cavity preparation.
    Stiesch-Scholz M; Hannig M
    J Adhes Dent; 2000; 2(3):213-22. PubMed ID: 11317395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Resistance to maxillary premolar fractures after restoration of class II preparations with resin composite or ceromer.
    de Freitas CR; Miranda MI; de Andrade MF; Flores VH; Vaz LG; Guimarães C
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Sep; 33(8):589-94. PubMed ID: 12238690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays compared to composite restorations.
    Lange RT; Pfeiffer P
    Oper Dent; 2009; 34(3):263-72. PubMed ID: 19544814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Class II composite restorations: importance of cervical enamel in vitro.
    Laegreid T; Gjerdet NR; Vult von Steyern P; Johansson AK
    Oper Dent; 2011; 36(2):187-95. PubMed ID: 21777100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Features of fracture of prosthetic tooth-endocrown constructions by means of acoustic emission analysis.
    Skalskyi V; Makeev V; Stankevych O; Pavlychko R
    Dent Mater; 2018 Mar; 34(3):e46-e55. PubMed ID: 29409675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Interfacial gaps following ceramic inlay cementation vs direct composites.
    Iida K; Inokoshi S; Kurosaki N
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(4):445-52. PubMed ID: 12877431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of restoration method on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
    Yamada Y; Tsubota Y; Fukushima S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):94-8. PubMed ID: 15008239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.