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 *

347 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21179997)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth, with variable marginal ridge thicknesses, restored with composite resin and composite resin reinforced with Ribbond: an in vitro study.
    Kalburge V; Yakub SS; Kalburge J; Hiremath H; Chandurkar A
    Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(2):193-8. PubMed ID: 23965445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of fiber post and cusp coverage on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars directly restored with composite resin.
    Mohammadi N; Kahnamoii MA; Yeganeh PK; Navimipour EJ
    J Endod; 2009 Oct; 35(10):1428-32. PubMed ID: 19801245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Fracture resistance of root filled premolar teeth restored with direct composite resin with or without cusp coverage.
    Xie KX; Wang XY; Gao XJ; Yuan CY; Li JX; Chu CH
    Int Endod J; 2012 Jun; 45(6):524-9. PubMed ID: 22242600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. In vitro fracture resistance of endodontically-treated maxillary premolars.
    Oskoee SS; Oskoee PA; Navimipour EJ; Shahi S
    Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):510-4. PubMed ID: 17910229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
    Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
    J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Influence of cavity design and restorative material on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars.
    Cubas GB; Camacho GB; Pereira-Cenci T; Nonaka T; Barbin EL
    Gen Dent; 2010; 58(2):e84-8. PubMed ID: 20236909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Gomide HA; Araujo CA; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):114-22. PubMed ID: 18262012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of restoration method on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
    Yamada Y; Tsubota Y; Fukushima S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):94-8. PubMed ID: 15008239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth.
    Gianordoli Neto R; Santiago SL; Mendonça JS; Passos VF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 May; 9(4):26-33. PubMed ID: 18473024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of two types of composite fibers on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars: an in vitro study.
    Oskoee PA; Chaharom ME; Kimyai S; Oskoee JS; Varasteh S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2011 Jan; 12(1):30-4. PubMed ID: 22186687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
    Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of adhesive techniques on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with various residual wall thicknesses.
    Scotti N; Rota R; Scansetti M; Paolino DS; Chiandussi G; Pasqualini D; Berutti E
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):376-82. PubMed ID: 24095213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Thickness of CAD-CAM composite resin overlays influences fatigue resistance of endodontically treated premolars.
    Magne P; Knezevic A
    Dent Mater; 2009 Oct; 25(10):1264-8. PubMed ID: 19539358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of different restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated molars.
    Cobankara FK; Unlu N; Cetin AR; Ozkan HB
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):526-33. PubMed ID: 18833859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.