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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1939791)

  • 1. A clinical study on direct and indirect Class II posterior composite resin restorations: design of the investigation.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Akerboom HB; Borgmeijer PJ; Kemp-Scholte CM
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1991; 58(4):281-8. PubMed ID: 1939791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Radiographic assessments of Class II resin composite restorations in a clinical study: baseline results.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Akerboom HB; Borgmeijer PJ; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1992; 59(2):97-107. PubMed ID: 1583203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations.
    Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA
    Dent Mater; 2007 Jan; 23(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 16417916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of occlusal marginal adaptation of Class II resin-composite restorations.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Akerboom HB; Borgmeijer PJ; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(4-5):310-4. PubMed ID: 8258575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of occlusal marginal adaptation of Class II resin composite inlays.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1994; 61(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 8182195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiographic assessments of Class II resin composite inlays.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Akerboom HB; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1994; 61(3):192-8. PubMed ID: 8089348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations.
    Deliperi S; Bardwell DN
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2006; 18(5):256-65; discussion 266-7. PubMed ID: 16987320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in small to moderate-sized Class II preparations of conventional design.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2000 May; 31(5):347-52. PubMed ID: 11203946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A randomized clinical trial of cusp-replacing resin composite restorations: efficiency and short-term effectiveness.
    Kuijs RH; Fennis WM; Kreulen CM; Roeters FJ; Creugers NH; Burgersdijk RC
    Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(4):349-54. PubMed ID: 16900817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The longevity of resin-based composite restorations in posterior teeth.
    Hondrum SO
    Gen Dent; 2000; 48(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 11199613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
    da Rosa Rodolpho PA; Cenci MS; Donassollo TA; Loguércio AD; Demarco FF
    J Dent; 2006 Aug; 34(7):427-35. PubMed ID: 16314023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Class II glass ionomer cermet tunnel, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations over 2 years.
    Wilkie R; Lidums A; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):181-4. PubMed ID: 7803004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The composite resin restoration: a literature review. Part II. Comparisons between composite and alloy restorations.
    Full CA; Hollander WR
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):52-6. PubMed ID: 8432948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations.
    Hickel R; Manhart J; García-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):41D-54D. PubMed ID: 11763918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with extensive composite resin restorations.
    Plotino G; Buono L; Grande NM; Lamorgese V; Somma F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Mar; 99(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 18319094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical evaluation of a posterior resin composite: 3-year results.
    Wendt SL; Leinfelder KF
    Am J Dent; 1994 Aug; 7(4):207-11. PubMed ID: 7986437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Prevalence of postoperative sensitivity with indirect Class II resin composite inlays.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Gruythuysen RJ; Borgmeijer PJ; Akerboom HB
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(2):95-8. PubMed ID: 8486862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Occlusal glass ionomer cermet, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations: a 2-year clinical study.
    Lidums A; Wilkie R; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 7803005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
    Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.