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 *

183 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21104100)

  • 21. Two-year clinical performance of self-etching adhesive systems in composite restorations of anterior teeth.
    Barcellos DC; Batista GR; Silva MA; Pleffken PR; Rangel PM; Fernandes VV; Di Nicoló R; Torres CR
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(3):258-66. PubMed ID: 23110580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies.
    Aggarwal V; Singla M; Yadav S; Yadav H
    J Dent; 2014 May; 42(5):619-25. PubMed ID: 24631232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
    Shi L; Wang X; Zhao Q; Zhang Y; Zhang L; Ren Y; Chen Z
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 20166406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. One-year Clinical Evaluation of Resin Composite Restorations of Noncarious Cervical Lesions in Smokers.
    de Carvalho LD; Gondo R; Lopes GC
    J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug; 17(5):405-11. PubMed ID: 26525004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner.
    Ernst CP; Canbek K; Aksogan K; Willershausen B
    Clin Oral Investig; 2003 Sep; 7(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 12898294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.
    Arhun N; Celik C; Yamanel K
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(4):397-404. PubMed ID: 20672723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A randomized controlled 30 years follow up of three conventional resin composites in Class II restorations.
    Pallesen U; van Dijken JW
    Dent Mater; 2015 Oct; 31(10):1232-44. PubMed ID: 26321155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity.
    van Dijken JWV; Pallesen U; Benetti A
    Dent Mater; 2019 Feb; 35(2):335-343. PubMed ID: 30527586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A 15-year randomized controlled study of a reduced shrinkage stress resin composite.
    van Dijken JW; Lindberg A
    Dent Mater; 2015 Sep; 31(9):1150-8. PubMed ID: 26205382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Influence of chlorhexidine digluconate on the clinical performance of adhesive restorations: a 3-year follow-up.
    Sartori N; Stolf SC; Silva SB; Lopes GC; Carrilho M
    J Dent; 2013 Dec; 41(12):1188-95. PubMed ID: 24076103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner.
    Efes BG; Dörter C; Gömeç Y; Koray F
    J Adhes Dent; 2006 Apr; 8(2):119-26. PubMed ID: 16708724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A randomized controlled 27 years follow up of three resin composites in Class II restorations.
    Pallesen U; van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2015 Dec; 43(12):1547-58. PubMed ID: 26363442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Five-year Clinical Evaluation of a Nanofilled and a Nanohybrid Composite in Class IV Cavities.
    Demirci M; Tuncer S; Sancakli HS; Tekçe N; Baydemir C
    Oper Dent; 2018; 43(3):261-271. PubMed ID: 29533716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of a resin-based sealant with a nano-filled flowable resin composite on sealing performance of marginal defects in resin composites restorations: a 36-months clinical evaluation.
    Estay J; Pardo-Díaz C; Reinoso E; Perez-Iñigo J; Martín J; Jorquera G; Kuga M; Fernández E
    Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Oct; 26(10):6087-6095. PubMed ID: 35608683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical performance of fiber-reinforced nanofilled resin composite in extensively carious posterior teeth of children: 30-month evaluation.
    Candan U; Eronat N; Onçağ O
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2013; 38(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 24579274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Clinical Performance of Nanofilled and Microhybrid Direct Composite Restorations on Endodontically Treated Teeth.
    Akalιn TT; Bozkurt FO; Tuncer AK; Bağ HG; Özcan M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2019 Feb; 27(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 30779495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.