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 *

209 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18505228)

  • 1. Modified matrix band design for ultra-conservative posterior restorations.
    Deliperi S
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(3):356-60. PubMed ID: 18505228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of matrix systems on proximal contact tightness of 2- and 3-surface posterior composite restorations in vivo.
    Wirsching E; Loomans BA; Klaiber B; Dörfer CE
    J Dent; 2011 May; 39(5):386-90. PubMed ID: 21414384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Resin composite contours.
    Sidelsky H
    Br Dent J; 2010 May; 208(9):395-401. PubMed ID: 20448605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH; Klein-Júnior CA; Camargo JC; Beskow T; Balestrin MD; Demarco FF
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Class II composite restorations and proximal concavities: clinical implications and management.
    Patras M; Doukoudakis S
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(2):119-24. PubMed ID: 22788722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.
    Mendonça JS; Neto RG; Santiago SL; Lauris JR; Navarro MF; de Carvalho RM
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations.
    Kiremitci A; Alpaslan T; Gurgan S
    Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 19192832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Three-year clinical evaluation of cuspal coverage with combined composite-amalgam in endodontically-treated maxillary premolars.
    Shafiei F; Memarpour M; Doozandeh M
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):599-604. PubMed ID: 21179997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Functional and aesthetic guidelines for stress-reduced direct posterior composite restorations.
    Deliperi S
    Oper Dent; 2012; 37(4):425-31. PubMed ID: 22816500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Air abrasion: the new renaissance with an H2O twist.
    Malterud MI
    Dent Today; 2010 Oct; 29(10):146, 148-9. PubMed ID: 21086804
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effect of various placement techniques on the microhardness of Class II (slot) resin composite restorations.
    Moosavi H; Abedini S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 Sep; 10(5):E009-16. PubMed ID: 19838605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Creating the "Perfect" Class V Composite: The Matrix Is Key.
    Belvedere PC; Lambert DL
    Dent Today; 2016 Feb; 35(2):104, 106-7. PubMed ID: 26995844
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of prepolymerized composite megafiller on the marginal adaptation of composite restorations in cavities with different C-factors: an SEM study.
    Bhushan S; Logani A; Shah N
    Indian J Dent Res; 2010; 21(4):500-5. PubMed ID: 21187613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical comparison of bur- and laser-prepared minimally invasive occlusal resin composite restorations: two-year follow-up.
    Yazici AR; Baseren M; Gorucu J
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(5):500-7. PubMed ID: 20945740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. "The simplified concept": predictable posterior composites.
    Smithson J
    Dent Today; 2012 Jan; 31(1):136-8, 140. PubMed ID: 22360120
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Efficacy of composites filled with nanoparticles in permanent molars: Six-month results.
    Andrade AK; Duarte RM; Silva FD; Batista AU; Lima KC; Pontual ML; Montes MA
    Gen Dent; 2010; 58(5):e190-5. PubMed ID: 20829151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessment of laminate technique using glass ionomer and resin composite for restoration of root filled teeth.
    Taha NA; Palamara JE; Messer HH
    J Dent; 2012 Aug; 40(8):617-23. PubMed ID: 22521705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of cyclic loading on marginal adaptation and bond strength in direct vs. indirect class II MO composite restorations.
    Aggarwal V; Logani A; Jain V; Shah N
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):587-92. PubMed ID: 18833866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Facilitating reproduction of occlusal anatomy of posterior composite restorations: the mini-matrix.
    Leni F
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 13(7):539-44; quiz 546. PubMed ID: 11685833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.