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 *

234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18352920)

  • 41. Re: Effect of resin-removal methods on enamel and shear bond strength of rebonded brackets.
    Campbell PM
    Angle Orthod; 2006 Nov; 76(6):i; author reply i-ii. PubMed ID: 17120353
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Porcelain surface roughness, color and gloss changes after orthodontic bonding.
    Jarvis J; Zinelis S; Eliades T; Bradley TG
    Angle Orthod; 2006 Mar; 76(2):274-7. PubMed ID: 16539553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Surface roughness and wettability of enamel and dentine surfaces prepared with different dental burs.
    Al-Omari WM; Mitchell CA; Cunningham JL
    J Oral Rehabil; 2001 Jul; 28(7):645-50. PubMed ID: 11422697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Comparison of enamel surface roughness and color alteration after bracket debonding and polishing with 2 systems: A split-mouth clinical trial.
    Pinzan-Vercelino CRM; Souza Costa AC; Gurgel JA; Salvatore Freitas KM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Nov; 160(5):686-694. PubMed ID: 34332796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth.
    Ghazal M; Kern M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 May; 101(5):342-9. PubMed ID: 19410068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of enamel after various stripping methods.
    Arman A; Cehreli SB; Ozel E; Arhun N; Cetinşahin A; Soyman M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Aug; 130(2):131.e7-14. PubMed ID: 16905055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Comparison of finishing and polishing systems for residual resin removal after debonding.
    Ulusoy C
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2009; 17(3):209-15. PubMed ID: 19466253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Comparative evaluation of the enamel margins roughness obtained with different finishing devices.
    Scotti N; Bregola A; Chiandussi G; Paolino D; Pasqualini D; Berutti E
    Minerva Stomatol; 2012; 61(1-2):1-9. PubMed ID: 22274305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Enamel subsurface damage due to tooth preparation with diamonds.
    Xu HH; Kelly JR; Jahanmir S; Thompson VP; Rekow ED
    J Dent Res; 1997 Oct; 76(10):1698-706. PubMed ID: 9326903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The effects of bracket removal on enamel.
    Heravi F; Rashed R; Raziee L
    Aust Orthod J; 2008 Nov; 24(2):110-5. PubMed ID: 19113075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Is surface roughness of resin composites affected by operator's performance?
    Jung M; Otte A; Klimek J
    Am J Dent; 2008 Feb; 21(1):3-6. PubMed ID: 18435367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Micro-morphometric assessment of titanium plasma-sprayed coating removal using burs for the treatment of peri-implant disease.
    Rimondini L; Cicognani Simoncini F; Carrassi A
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2000 Apr; 11(2):129-38. PubMed ID: 11168203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The machining of cobalt-chromium alloy in partial denture construction.
    Xenodimitropoulou G; Radford DR
    Int J Prosthodont; 1998; 11(6):565-73. PubMed ID: 10023219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Enamel surfaces after orthodontic bracket debonding.
    Campbell PM
    Angle Orthod; 1995; 65(2):103-10. PubMed ID: 7785800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Effects of tooth preparation burs and luting cement types on the marginal fit of extracoronal restorations.
    Ayad MF
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Feb; 18(2):145-51. PubMed ID: 19054303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. In vitro study assessing enamel surface roughness subsequent to various final finishing procedures after debonding.
    Roush EL; Marshall SD; Forbes DP; Perry FU
    Northwest Dent Res; 1997; 7(2):2-6. PubMed ID: 9487906
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Different methods of finishing and polishing enamel.
    Giampaolo ET; Machado AL; Pavarina AC; Vergani CE
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Feb; 89(2):135-40. PubMed ID: 12616232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Assessment of enamel damage after removal of ceramic brackets.
    Kitahara-Céia FM; Mucha JN; Marques dos Santos PA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Oct; 134(4):548-55. PubMed ID: 18929273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. A pilot investigation of enamel reduction procedures.
    Rossouw PE; Tortorella A
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2003 Jun; 69(6):384-8. PubMed ID: 12787476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Effect of orthodontic debonding and residual adhesive removal on 3D enamel microroughness.
    Janiszewska-Olszowska J; Tomkowski R; Tandecka K; Stepien P; Szatkiewicz T; Sporniak-Tutak K; Grocholewicz K
    PeerJ; 2016; 4():e2558. PubMed ID: 27761343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.