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 *

162 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1838771)

  • 1. Fracture resistance of pin-retained amalgam, composite resin, and alloy-reinforced glass ionomer core materials.
    Kao EC
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Oct; 66(4):463-71. PubMed ID: 1838771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Fracture resistance of four core materials with incorporated pins.
    Kao EC; Hart S; Johnston WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 1989; 2(6):569-78. PubMed ID: 2701071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Fracture resistance of composite and amalgam cores retained by pins coated with new adhesive resins.
    Tjan AH; Dunn JR; Grant BE
    J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Jun; 67(6):752-60. PubMed ID: 1403855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fracture resistance of five pin-retained core build-up materials on teeth with and without extracoronal preparation.
    Burke FJ; Shaglouf AG; Combe EC; Wilson NH
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 11203847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Shear bond strength of amalgam reinforced with a bonding agent and/or dentin pins.
    Sen D; Nayir E; Cetiner F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Apr; 87(4):446-50. PubMed ID: 12011862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Parapulpal pins and their effects on the fracture resistance of pin-retained cores.
    Haller B; Götze W; Weiss G
    J Oral Rehabil; 1991 Sep; 18(5):459-69. PubMed ID: 1800696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Influence of different transitional restorations on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
    Qualtrough AJ; Cawte SG; Wilson NH
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Retention of core composites, glass ionomers, and cermets by a self-threading dentin pin: the influence of fracture toughness upon failure.
    Lloyd CH; Butchart DG
    Dent Mater; 1990 Jul; 6(3):185-8. PubMed ID: 2086292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
    Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mechanical properties and radiopacity of experimental glass-silica-metal hybrid composites.
    Jandt KD; Al-Jasser AM; Al-Ateeq K; Vowles RW; Allen GC
    Dent Mater; 2002 Sep; 18(6):429-35. PubMed ID: 12098571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fracture durability of restored functional cusps on maxillary nonvital premolar teeth.
    Ulusoy N; Nayyar A; Morris CF; Fairhurst CW
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Sep; 66(3):330-5. PubMed ID: 1800729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fracture resistance of amalgam and composite resin cores retained by various intradentinal retentive features.
    Tjan AH; Dunn JR; Lee JK
    Quintessence Int; 1993 Mar; 24(3):211-7. PubMed ID: 8511280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In vitro evaluation of five core materials.
    Gu S; Rasimick BJ; Deutsch AS; Musikant BL
    J Prosthodont; 2007; 16(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 17244304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bonding amalgam to enamel: shear bond strength and SEM morphology.
    Dhanasomboon S; Nikaido T; Shimada Y; Tagami J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):297-303. PubMed ID: 11552167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. In vitro shear strength of bonded amalgam cores with and without pins.
    Lo CS; Millstein PL; Nathanson D
    J Prosthet Dent; 1995 Oct; 74(4):385-91. PubMed ID: 8531157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. In vitro fracture resistance of teeth with dentin-bonded ceramic crowns and core build-ups.
    Lang M; McHugh S; Burke FJ
    Am J Dent; 2003 Sep; 16 Spec No():88A-96A. PubMed ID: 14674507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results.
    Neme AL; Evans DB; Maxson BB
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fracture resistance of complex amalgam restorations.
    Burgess JO; Alvarez A; Summitt JB
    Oper Dent; 1997; 22(3):128-32. PubMed ID: 9484151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Replacement of missing cusps: an in vitro study.
    Macpherson LC; Smith BG
    J Dent; 1994 Apr; 22(2):118-20. PubMed ID: 8195477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Fracture resistance of extensive amalgam restorations retained by pins, amalgapins and amalgam bonding agents.
    Imbery TA; Coudron J; Moon PC
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(6):666-74. PubMed ID: 19051860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.