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.
47. 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]
48. Fracture resistance of endodontically prepared teeth using various restorative materials. Oliveira Fde C; Denehy GE; Boyer DB J Am Dent Assoc; 1987 Jul; 115(1):57-60. PubMed ID: 3475370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with class II bonded composite resin. Eakle WS J Dent Res; 1986 Feb; 65(2):149-53. PubMed ID: 3511111 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures. Reeh ES; Messer HH; Douglas WH J Endod; 1989 Nov; 15(11):512-6. PubMed ID: 2639947 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. 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]
53. Fracture resistance of teeth with resin-bonded restorations. Stampalia LL; Nicholls JI; Brudvik JS; Jones DW J Prosthet Dent; 1986 Jun; 55(6):694-8. PubMed ID: 3522863 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Effect of bonded amalgam on the fracture resistance of teeth. Eakle WS; Staninec M; Lacy AM J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Aug; 68(2):257-60. PubMed ID: 1501170 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Three-year clinical evaluation of cuspal coverage with combined composite-amalgam in endodontically-treated maxillary premolars. Shafiei F; Memarpour M; Doozandeh M Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):599-604. PubMed ID: 21179997 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Clinical evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations in endodontically treated premolar teeth: a one-year evaluation. Ahrari F; Nojoomian M; Moosavi H J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Oct; 11(5):009-16. PubMed ID: 20978719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Cuspal deformation and fracture resistance of teeth with dentin adhesives and composites. Sheth JJ; Fuller JL; Jensen ME J Prosthet Dent; 1988 Nov; 60(5):560-9. PubMed ID: 3058937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. The influence of resin composite and bonded amalgam restorations on dentine permeability in Class II cavities in vitro. Ozok AR; De Gee AJ; Wu MK; Wesselink PR Dent Mater; 2001 Nov; 17(6):477-84. PubMed ID: 11567684 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth, with variable marginal ridge thicknesses, restored with composite resin and composite resin reinforced with Ribbond: an in vitro study. Kalburge V; Yakub SS; Kalburge J; Hiremath H; Chandurkar A Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(2):193-8. PubMed ID: 23965445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution. Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Gomide HA; Araujo CA; Martins LR; Soares CJ J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):114-22. PubMed ID: 18262012 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]