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 *

289 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17004564)

  • 41. Clinical evaluation of a resin-based desensitizing agent and a self-etching adhesive on the reduction of postoperative sensitivity of amalgam restorations.
    Hajizadeh H; Akbari M; Ghavamnasiri M; Abedini S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Nov; 9(7):9-16. PubMed ID: 18997911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. The amalgam-free dental school.
    Roeters FJ; Opdam NJ; Loomans BA
    J Dent; 2004 Jul; 32(5):371-7. PubMed ID: 15193785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Reasons for placement and replacement of dental restorations in the United States Navy Dental Corps.
    York AK; Arthur JS
    Oper Dent; 1993; 18(5):203-8. PubMed ID: 8152990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A randomized controlled clinical trial of a HEMA-free all-in-one adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions at 1 year.
    Van Landuyt KL; Peumans M; Fieuws S; De Munck J; Cardoso MV; Ermis RB; Lambrechts P; Van Meerbeek B
    J Dent; 2008 Oct; 36(10):847-55. PubMed ID: 18656295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
    Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
    Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. [Mixed amalgam-composite restorations].
    Dallari A; Rovatti L
    Attual Dent; 1987 Apr; 3(14):10-1, 13-9. PubMed ID: 3477241
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite in non-carious Class V lesions: two-year results.
    Turner EW; Shook LW; Ross JA; deRijk W; Eason BC
    J Tenn Dent Assoc; 2008; 88(2):20-4; quiz 24-5. PubMed ID: 18593093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Factors influencing dentists' choice of amalgam and tooth-colored restorative materials for Class II preparations in younger patients.
    Vidnes-Kopperud S; Tveit AB; Gaarden T; Sandvik L; Espelid I
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2009; 67(2):74-9. PubMed ID: 19085213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Survival of self-etch adhesive Class II composite restorations using ART and conventional cavity preparations in primary molars.
    Eden E; Topaloglu-Ak A; Frencken JE; van't Hof M
    Am J Dent; 2006 Dec; 19(6):359-63. PubMed ID: 17212078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The sealed composite resin restoration.
    Henderson HZ; Setcos JC
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1985; 52(4):300-2. PubMed ID: 3860528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The use of dental amalgam in pediatric dentistry: review of the literature.
    Osborne JW; Summitt JB; Roberts HW
    Pediatr Dent; 2002; 24(5):439-47. PubMed ID: 12412958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. [Repair and revision 1. Repair or replacement of amalgam].
    Penning C
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2001 Feb; 108(2):46-9. PubMed ID: 11383278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Failure, repair, refurbishing and longevity of restorations.
    Mjör IA; Gordan VV
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(5):528-34. PubMed ID: 12216574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Sealing of restorations with marginal defects does not affect their longevity.
    Estay J; Martin J; Vildósola P; Villablanca C; Mjör I; de Oliveira OB; Laske M; Loomans B; de Andrade MF; Moncada G; Gordan VV; Opdam N; Fernández E
    Am J Dent; 2018 Apr; 31(2):107-112. PubMed ID: 29630796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth.
    Gianordoli Neto R; Santiago SL; Mendonça JS; Passos VF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 May; 9(4):26-33. PubMed ID: 18473024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Sealing composite with defective margins, good care or over treatment? Results of a 10-year clinical trial.
    Fernández E; Martin J; Vildósola P; Estay J; de Oliveira Júnior OB; Gordan V; Mjor I; Gonzalez J; Loguercio AD; Moncada G
    Oper Dent; 2015; 40(2):144-52. PubMed ID: 25535778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Influence of finishing and polishing procedures on the decision to replace old amalgam restorations: an in vitro study.
    Oleinisky JC; Baratieri LN; Ritter AV; Felipe LA; de Freitas SF
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Dec; 27(12):833-40. PubMed ID: 9452677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Clinical performance and SEM evaluation of direct composite restorations in primary molars.
    Puppin-Rontani RM; de Góes MF; Voelske CE; García-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2006 Oct; 19(5):255-61. PubMed ID: 17073199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The sealant restoration: indications, success and clinical technique.
    Hassall DC; Mellor AC
    Br Dent J; 2001 Oct; 191(7):358-62. PubMed ID: 11697597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Repair or replacement of amalgam restorations: decisions at a USA and a UK dental school.
    Setcos JC; Khosravi R; Wilson NH; Shen C; Yang M; Mjör IA
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(4):392-7. PubMed ID: 15279477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.