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.
119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12908062)
1. Effect of prophylactic treatments on the superficial roughness of dental tissues and of two esthetic restorative materials. Salami D; Luz MA Pesqui Odontol Bras; 2003; 17(1):63-8. PubMed ID: 12908062 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of Dental Prophylaxis Techniques on the Surface Roughness of Resin Composites. Gomes IA; Mendes HG; Filho EMM; de C Rizzi C; Nina MG; Turssi CP; Vasconcelos AJ; Bandeca MC; de Jesus Tavarez RR J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 Jan; 19(1):37-41. PubMed ID: 29358532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of four prophylaxis pastes on surface roughness of a composite, a hybrid ionomer, and a compomer restorative material. Warren DP; Colescott TD; Henson HA; Powers JM J Esthet Restor Dent; 2002; 14(4):245-51. PubMed ID: 12214949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effect of different enamel treatments on bond strength using resin dental adhesives. Armas-Vega AC; Arana-Chavez VE; Botter DA; Netto NG; Luz MA Quintessence Int; 2007 Jun; 38(6):e321-8. PubMed ID: 17625620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. The effect of prophylaxis method on microtensile bond strength of indirect restorations to dentin. Soares CJ; Pereira JC; Souza SJ; Menezes MS; Armstrong SR Oper Dent; 2012; 37(6):602-9. PubMed ID: 22616925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The surface roughness of restorative materials and dental tissues after polishing with prophylaxis and polishing pastes. Roulet JF; Roulet-Mehrens TK J Periodontol; 1982 Apr; 53(4):257-66. PubMed ID: 6951995 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An in vitro comparison of the effects of various air polishing powders on enamel and selected esthetic restorative materials. Barnes CM; Covey D; Watanabe H; Simetich B; Schulte JR; Chen H J Clin Dent; 2014; 25(4):76-87. PubMed ID: 26054183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of a desensitizing paste containing 8% arginine and calcium carbonate on the surface roughness of dental materials and human dental enamel. Garcia-Godoy F; Garcia-Godoy A; Garcia-Godoy C Am J Dent; 2009 Mar; 22 Spec No A():21A-24A. PubMed ID: 19472558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effects of a paste-free prophylaxis polishing cup and various prophylaxis polishing pastes on tooth enamel and restorative materials. Covey DA; Barnes C; Watanabe H; Johnson WW Gen Dent; 2011; 59(6):466-73; quiz 474-5. PubMed ID: 22313918 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Roughness of human enamel surface submitted to different prophylaxis methods. Castanho GM; Arana-Chavez VE; Fava M J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2008; 32(4):299-303. PubMed ID: 18767461 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Restoration-enamel interface with argon laser and visible light polymerization of compomer and composite resin restorations: a polarized light and scanning electron microscopic in vitro study. Hicks J; Ellis R; Flaitz C; Westerman G; Powell L J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2003; 27(4):353-8. PubMed ID: 12924736 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Neme AL; Frazier KB; Roeder LB; Debner TL Oper Dent; 2002; 27(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 11817469 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Effect of surface treatment on roughness and bond strength of a heat-pressed ceramic. Ayad MF; Fahmy NZ; Rosenstiel SF J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 18262013 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Flowable materials as an intermediate layer could improve the marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations in Class-V-cavities. Li Q; Jepsen S; Albers HK; Eberhard J Dent Mater; 2006 Mar; 22(3):250-7. PubMed ID: 16084584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Marginal adaptation of a new compomer under different conditioning methods. Luo Y; Tay FR; Lo EC; Wei SH J Dent; 2000 Sep; 28(7):495-500. PubMed ID: 10960753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effect of enamel preparation on the tensile bond strength of orthodontic composite resin. Gerbo LR; Lacefield WR; Wells BR; Russell CM Angle Orthod; 1992; 62(4):275-81; discussion 282. PubMed ID: 1333734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in Class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine. Dietrich T; Lösche AC; Lösche GM; Roulet JF J Dent; 1999 Feb; 27(2):119-28. PubMed ID: 10071469 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Marginal integrity of large compomer Class II restorations with cervical margins in dentine. Dietrich T; Kraemer M; Lösche GM; Roulet J J Dent; 2000 Aug; 28(6):399-405. PubMed ID: 10856804 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]