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 *

164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12800265)

  • 1. How well do fourth year Wits dental students place resin composite restorations?
    Lightfoot J; Clarke FM; Grossman ES
    SADJ; 2003 Mar; 58(2):56-61. PubMed ID: 12800265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Five-year clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students.
    Opdam NJ; Loomans BA; Roeters FJ; Bronkhorst EM
    J Dent; 2004 Jul; 32(5):379-83. PubMed ID: 15193786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of composite indirect restorations bonded to dentin treated with adhesive and low-viscosity composite.
    de Andrade OS; de Goes MF; Montes MA
    Dent Mater; 2007 Mar; 23(3):279-87. PubMed ID: 16546249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. SEM and microleakage evaluation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations with or without the use of a light-curable coating material and of polishing.
    Magni E; Zhang L; Hickel R; Bossù M; Polimeni A; Ferrari M
    J Dent; 2008 Nov; 36(11):885-91. PubMed ID: 18757129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
    da Rosa Rodolpho PA; Cenci MS; Donassollo TA; Loguércio AD; Demarco FF
    J Dent; 2006 Aug; 34(7):427-35. PubMed ID: 16314023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of placement techniques on the marginal adaptation of Class V composite restorations.
    Sensi LG; Marson FC; Baratieri LN; Monteiro Junior S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2005 Nov; 6(4):17-25. PubMed ID: 16299603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of layering techniques on the micro-tensile bond strength to dentin in resin composite restorations.
    Niu Y; Ma X; Fan M; Zhu S
    Dent Mater; 2009 Jan; 25(1):129-34. PubMed ID: 18614225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Amalgam and composite posterior restorations: curriculum versus practice in operative dentistry at a US dental school.
    Ottenga ME; Mjör I
    Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):524-8. PubMed ID: 17910231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations using a resin liner on deproteinized substrate.
    Correr GM; Bruschi Alonso RC; Puppin-Rontani RM; Correr-Sobrinho L; Coelho Sinhoreti MA
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2005 Aug; 63(4):227-32. PubMed ID: 16040445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effect of different adhesive types and curing methods on microleakage and the marginal adaptation of composite veneers.
    Maleknejad F; Moosavi H; Shahriari R; Sarabi N; Shayankhah T
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 May; 10(3):18-26. PubMed ID: 19430622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for a period of 3 years.
    Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
    Quintessence Int; 2005 May; 36(5):365-72. PubMed ID: 15892534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Micromorphological evaluation of posterior composite restorations - a 10-year report.
    Gaengler P; Hoyer I; Montag R; Gaebler P
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Oct; 31(10):991-1000. PubMed ID: 15387840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microscope observations of ART excavated cavities and restorations.
    Grossman ES; Mickenautsch S
    SADJ; 2002 Sep; 57(9):359-63. PubMed ID: 12494712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Influence of flowable composite lining thickness on Class II composite restorations.
    Chuang SF; Jin YT; Liu JK; Chang CH; Shieh DB
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(3):301-8. PubMed ID: 15195731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Class I and Class II silver amalgam and resin composite posterior restorations: teaching approaches in Canadian faculties of dentistry.
    McComb D
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2005 Jun; 71(6):405-6. PubMed ID: 15955263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
    Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
    Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Two-year clinical evaluation of repair versus replacement of composite restorations.
    Gordan VV; Shen C; Riley J; Mjör IA
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2006; 18(3):144-53; discussion 154. PubMed ID: 16831187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Attitudes of some European dental undergraduate students to the placement of direct restorative materials in posterior teeth.
    Lynch CD; Guillem SE; Nagrani B; Gilmour AS; Ericson D
    J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Dec; 37(12):916-26. PubMed ID: 20557432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dye staining gap test: an alternative method for assessing marginal gap formation in composite restorations.
    Caroline Bruschi Alonso R; Maria Correr G; Gonçalves Cunha L; Flávia Sanches Borges A; Maria Puppin-Rontani R; Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti M
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2006 Jun; 64(3):141-5. PubMed ID: 16809190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.