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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16366047)

  • 1. Split increment horizontal layering: a simplified placement technique for direct posterior resin restorations.
    Hassan K; Khier S
    Gen Dent; 2005; 53(6):406-9. PubMed ID: 16366047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Composite resin restorations of large class II cavities using split-increment horizontal placement technique.
    Hassan K; Khier S
    Gen Dent; 2006; 54(3):172-7. PubMed ID: 16776408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Directed polymerization shrinkage versus a horizontal incremental filling technique: interfacial adaptation in vivo in Class II cavities.
    van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P; Waern R
    Am J Dent; 1998 Aug; 11(4):165-72. PubMed ID: 10388370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of composite resin placement techniques on the microleakage of two self-etching dentin-bonding agents.
    Santini A; Plasschaert AJ; Mitchell S
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):132-6. PubMed ID: 11572288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaptation: direct composite resins vs ceramic inlays.
    Frankenberger R; Sindel J; Krämer N; Petschelt A
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):147-55. PubMed ID: 10530276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Achieving form and function for Class II restorations using aesthetic resin stratification.
    Shannon AT
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2006 Jun; 18(5):323-8. PubMed ID: 16903545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Direct posterior resin composite restorations: new techniques and clinical possibilities. Case reports.
    Lopes GC; Ferreira Rde S; Baratieri LN; Vieira LC; Monteiro JS
    Quintessence Int; 2002 May; 33(5):337-46. PubMed ID: 12014162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Marginal and internal adaptation of class II restorations after immediate or delayed composite placement.
    Dietschi D; Monasevic M; Krejci I; Davidson C
    J Dent; 2002; 30(5-6):259-69. PubMed ID: 12450717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An in vitro comparison of metal and transparent matrices used for bonded class II resin composite restorations.
    Müllejans R; Badawi MO; Raab WH; Lang H
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(2):122-6. PubMed ID: 12670066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Marginal adaption of Class V restorations with and without "softstart-polymerization".
    Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Hiller KA; Märkl A
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 11203787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH; Klein-Júnior CA; Camargo JC; Beskow T; Balestrin MD; Demarco FF
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of interfacial bond quality on the direction of polymerization shrinkage flow in resin composite restorations.
    Cho BH; Dickens SH; Bae JH; Chang CG; Son HH; Um CM
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(3):297-304. PubMed ID: 12022463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative in vivo and in vitro investigation of interfacial bond variability.
    Hannig M; Friedrichs C
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 11203774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Controversies in posterior composite resin restorations.
    Wilson EG; Mandradjieff M; Brindock T
    Dent Clin North Am; 1990 Jan; 34(1):27-44. PubMed ID: 2403943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Managing stress with composite resin, Part 1: The restorative-tooth interface.
    Terry DA; Leinfelder KF
    Dent Today; 2006 Dec; 25(12):98, 100-4; quiz 104. PubMed ID: 17193798
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of adhesive and flowable composite on postoperative sensitivity: 2-week results.
    Perdigão J; Anauate-Netto C; Carmo AR; Hodges JS; Cordeiro HJ; Lewgoy HR; Dutra-Corrêa M; Castilhos N; Amore R
    Quintessence Int; 2004; 35(10):777-84. PubMed ID: 15553285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 36-month clinical evaluation of two adhesives and microhybrid resin composites in Class I restorations.
    Swift EJ; Ritter AV; Heymann HO; Sturdevant JR; Wilder AD
    Am J Dent; 2008 Jun; 21(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 18686764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Direct posterior composite restorations: simplified success through a systematic approach.
    Koczarski MJ; Corredor AC
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2002; 14(1):87-94; quiz 96. PubMed ID: 11905163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.