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 *

232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19504133)

  • 1. Fracture frequency and longevity of fractured resin composite, polyacid-modified resin composite, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement class IV restorations: an up to 14 years of follow-up.
    van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
    Clin Oral Investig; 2010 Apr; 14(2):217-22. PubMed ID: 19504133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Durability of new restorative materials in Class III cavities.
    van Dijken JW
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 11317385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Longevity of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a polyacid-modified resin composite restoring non-carious cervical lesions in a general dental practice.
    Smales RJ; Ng KK
    Aust Dent J; 2004 Dec; 49(4):196-200. PubMed ID: 15762341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Class V lesions restored with four different tooth-colored materials--3-year results.
    Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2001 Mar; 5(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 11355096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations.
    Toledano M; Osorio E; Osorio R; García-Godoy F
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 May; 81(5):610-5. PubMed ID: 10220667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Tooth-colored filling materials for the restoration of cervical lesions: a 24-month follow-up study.
    Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hinkel R
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):251-8. PubMed ID: 11203827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Five-year double-blind randomized clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a polyacid-modified resin in noncarious cervical lesions.
    Loguercio AD; Reis A; Barbosa AN; Roulet JF
    J Adhes Dent; 2003; 5(4):323-32. PubMed ID: 15008339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.
    Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Lindberg M
    J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):124-9. PubMed ID: 16956709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Retrospective Study of the 3-Year Survival Rate of Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Class II Restorations in Primary Molars.
    Webman M; Mulki E; Roldan R; Arevalo O; Roberts JF; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2016; 40(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 26696100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material.
    Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Brackett MG
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 11203770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Class II restorations in primary teeth: 7-year study on three resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer.
    Qvist V; Laurberg L; Poulsen A; Teglers PT
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2004 Apr; 112(2):188-96. PubMed ID: 15056118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical performance of aesthetic restorative materials in primary teeth according to the FDI criteria.
    Bektas Donmez S; Uysal S; Dolgun A; Turgut MD
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2016 Sep; 17(3):202-212. PubMed ID: 27759409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.
    Ermiş RB
    Quintessence Int; 2002; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Longevity of posterior restorations in primary teeth: results from a paediatric dental clinic.
    Pinto Gdos S; Oliveira LJ; Romano AR; Schardosim LR; Bonow ML; Pacce M; Correa MB; Demarco FF; Torriani DD
    J Dent; 2014 Oct; 42(10):1248-54. PubMed ID: 25150105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Longevity of new hybrid restorative materials in class III cavities.
    van Dijken JW
    Eur J Oral Sci; 1999 Jun; 107(3):215-9. PubMed ID: 10424386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and a compomer in restoring non-carious cervical lesions. 5-year results.
    Folwaczny M; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):153-6. PubMed ID: 11572293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Shear bond strength of six restorative materials.
    Almuammar MF; Schulman A; Salama FS
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2001; 25(3):221-5. PubMed ID: 12049082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Interfacial adaptation of a Class II polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite laminate restoration in vivo.
    Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2000 Apr; 58(2):77-84. PubMed ID: 10894429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Clinical evaluation of different adhesive systems for restoring teeth with erosion lesions.
    Federlin M; Thonemann B; Schmalz G; Urlinger T
    Clin Oral Investig; 1998 Jun; 2(2):58-66. PubMed ID: 15490777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.