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 *

57 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1290611)

  • 1. Clinical evaluation of light-cured anterior resin composites over periods of up to 4 years.
    Smales RJ; Gerke DC
    Am J Dent; 1992 Aug; 5(4):208-12. PubMed ID: 1290611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Factors associated with clinical success of cervical abrasion/erosion restorations.
    Powell LV; Johnson GH; Gordon GE
    Oper Dent; 1995; 20(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 8700767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations.
    Brackett WW; Dib A; Brackett MG; Reyes AA; Estrada BE
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):477-81. PubMed ID: 14531590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.
    Ermiş RB
    Quintessence Int; 2002; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods.
    Brackett WW; Covey DA; St Germain HA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(3):218-22. PubMed ID: 12025819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. One-year clinical evaluation of an ethanol-based and a solvent-free dentin adhesive.
    Aw TC; Lepe X; Johnson GH; Mancl L
    Am J Dent; 2004 Dec; 17(6):451-6. PubMed ID: 15724760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Long-term deterioration of composite resin and amalgam restorations.
    Smales RJ
    Oper Dent; 1991; 16(6):202-9. PubMed ID: 1840079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of thickness of flowable resins on marginal leakage in class II composite restorations.
    Malmström HS; Schlueter M; Roach T; Moss ME
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):373-80. PubMed ID: 12120775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of enamel-bonding, type of restoration, patient age and operator on the longevity of an anterior composite resin.
    Smales RJ
    Am J Dent; 1991 Jun; 4(3):130-3. PubMed ID: 1830747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Five-year clinical evaluation of One-Up Bond F in non-carious cervical lesions.
    Burrow MF; Tyas MJ
    Am J Dent; 2007 Dec; 20(6):361-4. PubMed ID: 18269125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of direct esthetic restorations in cervical abrasion/erosion lesions: one-year results.
    Powell LV; Gordon GE; Johnson GH
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Sep; 22(9):687-92. PubMed ID: 1835107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. One-year clinical evaluation of two resin composites, two polymerization methods, and a resin-modified glass ionomer in non-carious cervical lesions.
    Koubi S; Raskin A; Bukiet F; Pignoly C; Toca E; Tassery H
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Nov; 7(5):42-53. PubMed ID: 17091139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Preventive resin restorations vs. amalgam restorations: a three-year clinical study.
    Cloyd S; Gilpatrick RO; Moore D
    J Tenn Dent Assoc; 1997 Oct; 77(4):36-40. PubMed ID: 9520761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A prospective randomised clinical trial of one bis-GMA-based and two ormocer-based composite restorative systems in class II cavities: three-year results.
    Bottenberg P; Alaerts M; Keulemans F
    J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):163-71. PubMed ID: 16963171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of Class V composite restorations: three-year results.
    Baratieri LN; Canabarro S; Lopes GC; Ritter AV
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):482-7. PubMed ID: 14531591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical comparison of Class V resin composite and glass ionomer restorations.
    Powell LV; Gordon GE; Johnson GH
    Am J Dent; 1992 Oct; 5(5):249-52. PubMed ID: 1299249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of new light curing units and bonding agents on the microleakage of Class V composite resin restorations.
    Pradelle-Plasse N; Besnault C; Souad N; Colon P
    Am J Dent; 2003 Dec; 16(6):409-13. PubMed ID: 15002957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Four-year clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and resin-based restorative material.
    Gordan VV; Shen C; Watson RE; Mjor IA
    Am J Dent; 2005 Feb; 18(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 15810481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Laboratory evaluation of compomers in Class V restorations.
    Chersoni S; Lorenzi R; Ferrieri P; Prati C
    Am J Dent; 1997 Jun; 10(3):147-51. PubMed ID: 9545890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.