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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1452867)

  • 1. Cavity convergence angles for direct composite inlays.
    Wassell RW; Walls AW; McCabe JF
    J Dent; 1992 Oct; 20(5):294-7. PubMed ID: 1452867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of stresses in molar teeth restored with inlays and direct restorations, including polymerization shrinkage of composite resin and tooth loading during mastication.
    Dejak B; Młotkowski A
    Dent Mater; 2015 Mar; 31(3):e77-87. PubMed ID: 25544104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
    Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Co-Influence of Restoration Bonding and Inlay Cavity Design on Fracture Load of Restored Tooth.
    Yli-Urpo T; Lassila L; Vallittu P; Närhi T
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2024 Feb; 32(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 37549134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [The finite element analysis of stress distribution in different size of MO cavities restored with composite resin inlays].
    Zhang L; Lu Y; Yang BS; Guo Y; Li FP
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2015 Apr; 24(2):170-6. PubMed ID: 25938145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro evaluation of push-out bond strength of direct ceramic inlays to tooth surface with fiber-reinforced composite at the interface.
    Cekic I; Ergun G; Uctasli S; Lassila LV
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 May; 97(5):271-8. PubMed ID: 17547945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Marginal fit and microleakage of indirect inlay systems.
    Reid JS; Saunders WP; Baidas KM
    Am J Dent; 1993 Apr; 6(2):81-4. PubMed ID: 8397988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of a "resin coating" on the interfacial adaptation of composite inlays.
    Jayasooriya PR; Pereira PN; Nikaido T; Burrow MF; Tagami J
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 12540115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of resin composite inlays in vitro.
    Roggendorf MJ; Krämer N; Dippold C; Vosen VE; Naumann M; Jablonski-Momeni A; Frankenberger R
    J Dent; 2012 Dec; 40(12):1068-73. PubMed ID: 22960537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: an in vitro study.
    Desai PD; Das UK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):877. PubMed ID: 22484893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Retention of composite inlays in enamel dentin cavities.
    Peutzfeldt A; Asmussen E
    Dent Mater; 1991 Jan; 7(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 1901810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations.
    Shor A; Nicholls JI; Phillips KM; Libman WJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 12675458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An in vitro evaluation of the marginal integrity of a porcelain inlay system.
    Qualtrough AJ; Cramer A; Wilson NH; Roulet JF; Noack M
    Int J Prosthodont; 1991; 4(6):517-23. PubMed ID: 1817522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Marginal characteristics of different filling materials and filling methods with standardized cavity preparation.
    Stoll R; Remes H; Kunzelmann KH; Stachniss V
    J Adhes Dent; 2000; 2(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 11317400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The influence of cavity preparation design on fracture strength and mode of fracture of laboratory-processed composite resin restorations.
    Fonseca RB; Fernandes-Neto AJ; Correr-Sobrinho L; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Oct; 98(4):277-84. PubMed ID: 17936127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fracture resistance and microtensile bond strength of maxillary premolars restored with two resin composite inlay systems.
    Sun YS; Chen YM; Smales RJ; Yip KH
    Am J Dent; 2008 Apr; 21(2):97-100. PubMed ID: 18578176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Stress distributions in adhesively cemented ceramic and resin-composite Class II inlay restorations: a 3D-FEA study.
    Ausiello P; Rengo S; Davidson CL; Watts DC
    Dent Mater; 2004 Nov; 20(9):862-72. PubMed ID: 15451242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of cavity wall taper on fracture resistance of teeth restored with resin composite inlays.
    Burke FJ; Wilson NH; Watts DC
    Oper Dent; 1993; 18(6):230-6. PubMed ID: 8152995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.