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 *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17243601)

  • 21. Influence of cement type on the marginal adaptation of all-ceramic MOD inlays.
    Rosentritt M; Behr M; Lang R; Handel G
    Dent Mater; 2004 Jun; 20(5):463-9. PubMed ID: 15081553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Influence of resin cement viscosity on microleakage of ceramic inlays.
    Hahn P; Attin T; Gröfke M; Hellwig E
    Dent Mater; 2001 May; 17(3):191-6. PubMed ID: 11257290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Relative gap formation of resin-cemented ceramic inlays and dentin bonding agents.
    Sorensen JA; Munksgaard EC
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Oct; 76(4):374-8. PubMed ID: 8897293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Fracture resistance of aluminium oxide and lithium disilicate-based crowns using different luting cements: an in vitro study.
    Al-Wahadni AM; Hussey DL; Grey N; Hatamleh MM
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 Mar; 10(2):51-8. PubMed ID: 19279972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Microleakage of porcelain veneer restorations bonded to enamel and dentin with a new self-adhesive resin-based dental cement.
    Ibarra G; Johnson GH; Geurtsen W; Vargas MA
    Dent Mater; 2007 Feb; 23(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 16499961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: 12-year follow-up.
    Santos MJ; Freitas MC; Azevedo LM; Santos GC; Navarro MF; Francischone CE; Mondelli RF
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Sep; 20(7):1683-90. PubMed ID: 26662120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Ceramic inlays and partial ceramic crowns: influence of remaining cusp wall thickness on the marginal integrity and enamel crack formation in vitro.
    Krifka S; Anthofer T; Fritzsch M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G; Federlin M
    Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):32-42. PubMed ID: 19192835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Short-term clinical evaluation of inlay and onlay restorations made with a ceromer.
    Monaco C; Baldissara P; dall'Orologio GD; Scotti R
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(1):81-6. PubMed ID: 11842911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Totally bonded ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years.
    Krämer N; Taschner M; Lohbauer U; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
    J Adhes Dent; 2008 Aug; 10(4):307-14. PubMed ID: 18792702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Evaluation of bond strength between leucite-based and lithium disilicate-based ceramics to dentin after cementation with conventional and self-adhesive resin agents.
    Rigolin FJ; Miranda ME; Flório FM; Basting RT
    Acta Odontol Latinoam; 2014; 27(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 25335361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. In vitro wear simulation measurements of composite versus resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements for all-ceramic restorations.
    Braga RR; Condon JR; Ferracane JL
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2002; 14(6):368-76. PubMed ID: 12542102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Autoradiographic determination of marginal leakage of a pressed glass ceramic inlay.
    Canay RS; Hersek NE; Uzun G; Ercan MT
    J Oral Rehabil; 1997 Sep; 24(9):705-8. PubMed ID: 9357752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. IPS Empress onlays luted with two dual-cured resin cements for endodontically treated teeth: a 3-year clinical evaluation.
    Atali PY; Cakmakcioglu O; Topbasi B; Turkmen C; Suslen O
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(1):40-2. PubMed ID: 21210001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. In vitro evaluation of wall-to-wall adaptation of a self-adhesive resin cement used for luting gold and ceramic inlays.
    Fabianelli A; Goracci C; Bertelli E; Monticelli F; Grandini S; Ferrari M
    J Adhes Dent; 2005; 7(1):33-40. PubMed ID: 15892362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Microleakage of inlay ceramic systems luted with self-adhesive resin cements.
    Uludag B; Yucedag E; Sahin V
    J Adhes Dent; 2014 Dec; 16(6):523-9. PubMed ID: 25264550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after six years: clinical behavior.
    Frankenberger R; Petschelt A; Krämer N
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):459-65. PubMed ID: 11203857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Microleakage in ceramic inlays luted with different resin cements.
    Mota CS; Demarco FF; Camacho GB; Powers JM
    J Adhes Dent; 2003; 5(1):63-70. PubMed ID: 12729085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical performance of pressed ceramic inlays luted with resin-modified glass ionomer and autopolymerizing resin composite cements.
    van Dijken JW; Ormin A; Olofsson AL
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Nov; 82(5):529-35. PubMed ID: 10559724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effects of cement-curing modes on dentin bonding of inlays.
    Zuellig-Singer R; Krejci I; Lutz F
    J Dent Res; 1992 Nov; 71(11):1842-6. PubMed ID: 1401449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.