234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18352920)
1. Effect of different splint removal techniques on the surface roughness of human enamel: a three-dimensional optical profilometry analysis.
Cehreli ZC; Lakshmipathy M; Yazici R
Dent Traumatol; 2008 Apr; 24(2):177-82. PubMed ID: 18352920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Enamel surface morphology after bracket debonding.
Osorio R; Toledano M; García-Godoy F
ASDC J Dent Child; 1998; 65(5):313-7, 354. PubMed ID: 9795734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Enamel loss and adhesive remnants following bracket removal and various clean-up procedures in vitro.
Ryf S; Flury S; Palaniappan S; Lussi A; van Meerbeek B; Zimmerli B
Eur J Orthod; 2012 Feb; 34(1):25-32. PubMed ID: 21228118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Enamel surface roughness following debonding using two resin grinding methods.
Eliades T; Gioka C; Eliades G; Makou M
Eur J Orthod; 2004 Jun; 26(3):333-8. PubMed ID: 15222720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of composite resin materials.
Attar N
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2007 Jan; 8(1):27-35. PubMed ID: 17211502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods.
Vidor MM; Felix RP; Marchioro EM; Hahn L
Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(2):61-7. PubMed ID: 25992989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Surface geometry of three packable and one hybrid composite after finishing.
Jung M; Voit S; Klimek J
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(1):53-9. PubMed ID: 12540119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An in vitro investigation of the effectiveness of bioactive glass air-abrasion in the 'selective' removal of orthodontic resin adhesive.
Banerjee A; Paolinelis G; Socker M; McDonald F; Watson TF
Eur J Oral Sci; 2008 Oct; 116(5):488-92. PubMed ID: 18821993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of a desensitizing paste containing 8% arginine and calcium carbonate on the surface roughness of dental materials and human dental enamel.
Garcia-Godoy F; Garcia-Godoy A; Garcia-Godoy C
Am J Dent; 2009 Mar; 22 Spec No A():21A-24A. PubMed ID: 19472558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of enamel surface following five composite removal methods after bracket debonding.
Hong YH; Lew KK
Eur J Orthod; 1995 Apr; 17(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 7781720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Surface roughness of the restored enamel after orthodontic treatment.
Ozer T; Başaran G; Kama JD
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Mar; 137(3):368-74. PubMed ID: 20197174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Enamel Surface Roughness after Debonding: A Comparative Study using Three Different Burs.
Garg R; Dixit P; Khosla T; Gupta P; Kalra H; Kumar P
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2018 May; 19(5):521-526. PubMed ID: 29807961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In vitro evaluation of enamel surface roughness and morphology after orthodontic debonding: Traditional cleanup systems versus polymer bur.
Soares Tenório KC; Neupmann Feres MF; Tanaka CJ; Augusto MKM; Rodrigues JA; Pereira da Silva HD; Arana-Chavez VE; Roscoe MG
Int Orthod; 2020 Sep; 18(3):546-554. PubMed ID: 32493624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of various debonding and adhesive clearance methods on enamel surface: an in vitro study.
Fan XC; Chen L; Huang XF
BMC Oral Health; 2017 Feb; 17(1):58. PubMed ID: 28241812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Three-dimensional optical profilometry analysis of surface states obtained after finishing sequences for three composite resins.
Joniot SB; Grégoire GL; Auther AM; Roques YM
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):311-5. PubMed ID: 11203836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Surface roughness and cutting efficiency of composite finishing instruments.
Jung M
Oper Dent; 1997; 22(3):98-104. PubMed ID: 9484147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Orthodontic bracket removal using conventional and ultrasonic debonding techniques, enamel loss, and time requirements.
Krell KV; Courey JM; Bishara SE
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1993 Mar; 103(3):258-66. PubMed ID: 8456784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of enamel after various post-stripping polishing methods: an in vitro study.
Gupta P; Gupta N; Patel N; Gupta R; Sandhu GS; Naik C
Aust Orthod J; 2012 Nov; 28(2):240-4. PubMed ID: 23304974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Enamel surface evaluation after removal of orthodontic composite remnants by intraoral sandblasting: a 3-dimensional surface profilometry study.
Kim SS; Park WK; Son WS; Ahn HS; Ro JH; Kim YD
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jul; 132(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 17628253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A scanning electron microscopy comparison of enamel polishing methods after air-rotor stripping.
Piacentini C; Sfondrini G
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1996 Jan; 109(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 8540483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
