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 *

63 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2076239)

  • 1. Posterior composite and glass ionomer/composite laminate restorations: 2-year clinical results.
    Grogono AL; McInnes PM; Zinck JH; Weinberg R
    Am J Dent; 1990 Aug; 3(4):147-52. PubMed ID: 2076239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 3-year clinical evaluation of glass ionomer cements as Class III restorations.
    Osborne JW; Berry TG
    Am J Dent; 1990 Apr; 3(2):40-3. PubMed ID: 2150170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
    Pascon FM; Kantovitz KR; Caldo-Teixeira AS; Borges AF; Silva TN; Puppin-Rontani RM; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Dent; 2006 Jul; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A clinical evaluation of a resin composite and a compomer in non-carious Class V lesions. A 3-year follow-up.
    Pollington S; van Noort R
    Am J Dent; 2008 Feb; 21(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 18435377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. A retrospective look at esthetic resin composite and glass-ionomer Class III restorations: a 2-year clinical evaluation.
    de Araujo MA; Araújo RM; Marsilio AL
    Quintessence Int; 1998 Feb; 29(2):87-93. PubMed ID: 9643241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The marginal seal of Class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer.
    Payne JH
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1999; 23(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 10204453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. [Glass ionomer cement and "sandwich" restorations after two years of clinical service].
    Reich E
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Feb; 46(2):161-4. PubMed ID: 1814714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Class II restorations with a polyacid-modified composite resin in primary molars placed in a dental practice: results of a two-year clinical evaluation.
    Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Mönting JS
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):259-64. PubMed ID: 11203828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 6-year results.
    Busato AL; Loguercio AD; Reis A; Carrilho MR
    Am J Dent; 2001 Oct; 14(5):304-8. PubMed ID: 11803995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Factors associated with clinical success of cervical abrasion/erosion restorations.
    Powell LV; Johnson GH; Gordon GE
    Oper Dent; 1995; 20(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 8700767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical evaluation of four Class 5 restorative materials: 3-year recall.
    Burgess JO; Gallo JR; Ripps AH; Walker RS; Ireland EJ
    Am J Dent; 2004 Jun; 17(3):147-50. PubMed ID: 15301207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 1-year clinical evaluation of Compoglass and Fuji II LC in cervical erosion/abfraction lesions.
    Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Gregory PN; Owens BM
    Am J Dent; 1999 Jun; 12(3):119-22. PubMed ID: 10649933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite.
    Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Buchalla W; Mönting JS
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 11572292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. One-year clinical evaluation of two resin composites, two polymerization methods, and a resin-modified glass ionomer in non-carious cervical lesions.
    Koubi S; Raskin A; Bukiet F; Pignoly C; Toca E; Tassery H
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Nov; 7(5):42-53. PubMed ID: 17091139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.
    Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; Chimello DT; Palma-Dibb RG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 31(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 15025658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Marginal leakage of combinations of glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations.
    Sarne S; Mante MO; Mante FK
    J Clin Dent; 1996; 7(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 9238879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Enamel remineralization on teeth adjacent to Class II glass ionomer restorations.
    Segura A; Donly KJ; Stratmann RG
    Am J Dent; 1997 Oct; 10(5):247-50. PubMed ID: 9522700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.