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 *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17073207)

  • 21. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite under different conditioning methods in primary teeth.
    Turgut MD; Tekçiçek M; Olmez S
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 15470873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.
    Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; Chimello DT; Palma-Dibb RG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 31(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 15025658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
    Pascon FM; Kantovitz KR; Caldo-Teixeira AS; Borges AF; Silva TN; Puppin-Rontani RM; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Dent; 2006 Jul; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Clinical evaluation of an ormocer, a nanofill composite and a hybrid composite at 2 years.
    Efes BG; Dörter C; Gömeç Y
    Am J Dent; 2006 Aug; 19(4):236-40. PubMed ID: 16939030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class V carious lesions: 5-year results.
    Demirci M; Sancakli HS; Uysal O
    Clin Oral Investig; 2008 Jun; 12(2):157-63. PubMed ID: 17968599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years.
    Andersson-Wenckert IE; van Dijken JW; Kieri C
    Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 15241909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Ketac Molar Versus Dyract Class II restorations in primary molars: twelve month clinical results.
    Marks LA; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Groen HJ; Martens LC
    ASDC J Dent Child; 2000; 67(1):37-41, 8-9. PubMed ID: 10736656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Clinical performance of a self-etching and a total-etch adhesive system - 2-year results.
    Bekes K; Boeckler L; Gernhardt CR; Schaller HG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2007 Nov; 34(11):855-61. PubMed ID: 17919253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A clinical evaluation of a resin composite and a compomer in non-carious Class V lesions. A 3-year follow-up.
    Pollington S; van Noort R
    Am J Dent; 2008 Feb; 21(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 18435377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth.
    Huth KC; Manhart J; Selbertinger A; Paschos E; Kaaden C; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
    Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 15241910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Clinical performance of a self-etch adhesive in Class V restorations made with and without acid etching.
    Abdalla AI; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Dent; 2007 Jul; 35(7):558-63. PubMed ID: 17467137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. One-year clinical evaluation of two composite materials used for anterior class V restorations.
    Sakrana AA; Tanoue N; Kawasaki K; Matsumura H
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Oct; 31(10):985-90. PubMed ID: 15387839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Five-year clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students.
    Opdam NJ; Loomans BA; Roeters FJ; Bronkhorst EM
    J Dent; 2004 Jul; 32(5):379-83. PubMed ID: 15193786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Two-year clinical evaluation of repair versus replacement of composite restorations.
    Gordan VV; Shen C; Riley J; Mjör IA
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2006; 18(3):144-53; discussion 154. PubMed ID: 16831187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Three-year clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite in minimally invasive occlusal cavities.
    Cehreli ZC; Altay N
    J Dent; 2000 Feb; 28(2):117-22. PubMed ID: 10666969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Clinical evaluation of a self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions.
    Abdalla AI; El Sayed HY
    Am J Dent; 2008 Oct; 21(5):327-30. PubMed ID: 19024260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Operator vs. material influence on clinical outcome of bonded ceramic inlays.
    Frankenberger R; Reinelt C; Petschelt A; Krämer N
    Dent Mater; 2009 Aug; 25(8):960-8. PubMed ID: 19344946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results.
    Roeters JJ; Frankenmolen F; Burgersdijk RC; Peters TC
    Am J Dent; 1998 Jun; 11(3):143-8. PubMed ID: 9823078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.