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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12886209)

  • 1. A simple method to estimate restoration volume as a possible predictor for tooth fracture.
    Sturdevant JR; Bader JD; Shugars DA; Steet TC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):162-7. PubMed ID: 12886209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The role of volume of multi-surface restorations in posterior teeth: Treatment options.
    Janus C; Sbeih I; Best AM
    Gen Dent; 2011; 59(6):486-91. PubMed ID: 22313920
    [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. Effect of restoration volume on stresses in a mandibular molar: a finite element study.
    Wayne JS; Chande R; Porter HC; Janus C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Oct; 112(4):925-31. PubMed ID: 24726589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Qualitative and quantitative determination of dental amalgam restoration volume.
    Covey DA; Kent DK; Dunning DG; Koka S
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Jul; 82(1):8-14. PubMed ID: 10384161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of amalgam bonding on the stiffness of teeth weakened by cavity preparation.
    Zidan O; Abdel-Keriem U
    Dent Mater; 2003 Nov; 19(7):680-5. PubMed ID: 12901995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?].
    De Moor R; Delmé K
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cusp fracture of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with amalgam. Teeth restored in Denmark before 1975 versus after 1979.
    Hansen EK; Asmussen E
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1993 Apr; 51(2):73-7. PubMed ID: 8498164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Study regarding coronal fracture probability in posterior amalgam restorations].
    Andrian S; Iovan G; Oncea C; Teodorovici P; Hasna M
    Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi; 2006; 110(3):692-7. PubMed ID: 17571568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Fracture resistance of root filled premolar teeth restored with direct composite resin with or without cusp coverage.
    Xie KX; Wang XY; Gao XJ; Yuan CY; Li JX; Chu CH
    Int Endod J; 2012 Jun; 45(6):524-9. PubMed ID: 22242600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. In vivo fractures of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with amalgam.
    Hansen EK; Asmussen E; Christiansen NC
    Endod Dent Traumatol; 1990 Apr; 6(2):49-55. PubMed ID: 2132209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment of the resistance to fracture of endodontically treated molars restored with amalgam.
    Assif D; Nissan J; Gafni Y; Gordon M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 May; 89(5):462-5. PubMed ID: 12806323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A study of primary teeth restored by intracoronal restorations in children participating in an undergraduate teaching programme at Cork University Dental School and Hospital, Ireland.
    Hurley E; Da Mata C; Stewart C; Kinirons M
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2015 Mar; 16(1):78-82. PubMed ID: 25793959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part I: fracture resistance and fracture mode.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Jan; 99(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 18182183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Impact-fracture energy of human premolar teeth.
    Salis SG; Hood JA; Kirk EE; Stokes AN
    J Prosthet Dent; 1987 Jul; 58(1):43-8. PubMed ID: 3475460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
    Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fracture strength and fracture patterns of maxillary premolars with approximal slot cavities.
    el-Mowafy OM
    Oper Dent; 1993; 18(4):160-6. PubMed ID: 8152985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Factors relating to usage patterns of amalgam and resin composite for posterior restorations--a prospective analysis.
    Khalaf ME; Alomari QD; Omar R
    J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):785-92. PubMed ID: 24769386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fracture durability of restored functional cusps on maxillary nonvital premolar teeth.
    Ulusoy N; Nayyar A; Morris CF; Fairhurst CW
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Sep; 66(3):330-5. PubMed ID: 1800729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of composite restorations on resistance to cuspal fracture in posterior teeth.
    Joynt RB; Wieczkowski G; Klockowski R; Davis EL
    J Prosthet Dent; 1987 Apr; 57(4):431-5. PubMed ID: 3471955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.