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: 1817941)

  • 1. [Amalgam fillings in the deciduous and mixed dentition--a post-treatment evaluation of service life and quality].
    Pieper K; Beinhauer A; Redeker M
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Sep; 46(9):606-8. PubMed ID: 1817941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [A long-term study of amalgam and composite fillings].
    Pieper K; Meyer G; Marienhagen B; Motsch A
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Mar; 46(3):222-5. PubMed ID: 1814726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The influence of restorative material on the survival rate of restorations in primary molars.
    Papathanasiou AG; Curzon ME; Fairpo CG
    Pediatr Dent; 1994; 16(4):282-8. PubMed ID: 7937261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Clinical aspects of restorative treatment in the primary dentition.
    Varpio M
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1993; 96():1-47. PubMed ID: 8310420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study.
    Kavvadia K; Kakaboura A; Vanderas AP; Papagiannoulis L
    Pediatr Dent; 2004; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison between stainless steel crowns and multisurface amalgams in primary molars.
    Braff MH
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1975; 42(6):474-8. PubMed ID: 1107373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Replacements of restorations in the primary and young permanent dentition.
    Wendt LK; Koch G; Birkhed D
    Swed Dent J; 1998; 22(4):149-55. PubMed ID: 9850557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Use of amalgam and stainless steel restorations for primary molars.
    Dawson LR; Simon JF; Taylor PP
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1981; 48(6):420-2. PubMed ID: 6946083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical evaluation of Class II combined amalgam-composite restorations in primary molars after 6 to 30 months.
    Holan G; Chosack A; Eidelman E
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1996; 63(5):341-5. PubMed ID: 8958346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Class II restorations with a polyacid-modified composite resin in primary molars placed in a dental practice: results of a two-year clinical evaluation.
    Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Mönting JS
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):259-64. PubMed ID: 11203828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Longevity of conventional and bonded (sealed) amalgam restorations in a private general dental practice.
    Bonsor SJ; Chadwick RG
    Br Dent J; 2009 Jan; 206(2):E3; discussion 88-9. PubMed ID: 19148188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Cermet cements for milk tooth fillings. Preliminary results].
    Hickel R; Petschelt A; Voss A
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Jun; 44(6):444-5. PubMed ID: 2517110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional cavity preparations for glass-ionomer restorations in primary molars: one-year results.
    Yip HK; Smales RJ; Yu C; Gao XJ; Deng DM
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Jan; 33(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 11887531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Silver amalgam versus resin modified GIC class-II restorations in primary molars: twelve month clinical evaluation.
    Dutta BN; Gauba K; Tewari A; Chawla HS
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2001 Sep; 19(3):118-22. PubMed ID: 11817797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Marginal fracture of amalgam restoration in deciduous teeth. 2. Marginal angles of amalgam restorations in deciduous anterior teeth].
    Yakushiji M; Imanishi T; Machida Y
    Shikwa Gakuho; 1970 Jan; 70(1):106-12. PubMed ID: 5264493
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effectiveness of ART and traditional amalgam approach in restoring single-surface cavities in posterior teeth of permanent dentitions in school children after 6.3 years.
    Frencken JE; van't Hof MA; Taifour D; Al-Zaher I
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 2007 Jun; 35(3):207-14. PubMed ID: 17518967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical evaluation of glass ionomer-silver cermet restorations in primary molars: one year results.
    Hung TW; Richardson AS
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1990 Mar; 56(3):239-40. PubMed ID: 2110027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Quality assessment of amalgam restorations provided for primary school children].
    Lusananda S; Panya-ngarm R; Charoensupaya O
    J Dent Assoc Thai; 1991; 41(1):18-23. PubMed ID: 1918568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Stainless steel crown versus multisurface amalgam restorations: an 8-year longitudinal clinical study.
    Einwag J; Dünninger P
    Quintessence Int; 1996 May; 27(5):321-3. PubMed ID: 8941814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Study of marginal fractures of amalgam restoration in the deciduous teeth. 1. Marginal angles of amalgam restoration in the deciduous molars].
    Machida Y; Imanishi T; Yakushi M
    Shikwa Gakuho; 1969 Jun; 69(6):940-8. PubMed ID: 5258264
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.