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 *

61 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2135269)

  • 21. Polishing occlusal surfaces of direct Class II composite restorations in vivo.
    Jung M; Hornung K; Klimek J
    Oper Dent; 2005; 30(2):139-46. PubMed ID: 15853097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. SEM and microleakage evaluation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations with or without the use of a light-curable coating material and of polishing.
    Magni E; Zhang L; Hickel R; Bossù M; Polimeni A; Ferrari M
    J Dent; 2008 Nov; 36(11):885-91. PubMed ID: 18757129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Class II composite restorations with metallic and translucent matrices: 2-year follow-up findings.
    Demarco FF; Cenci MS; Lima FG; Donassollo TA; André Dde A; Leida FL
    J Dent; 2007 Mar; 35(3):231-7. PubMed ID: 17034926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations.
    Sarrett DC
    Dent Mater; 2005 Jan; 21(1):9-20. PubMed ID: 15680997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) in Class II restorations of primary teeth: a two-year follow-up study.
    Papagiannoulis L; Kakaboura A; Pantaleon F; Kavvadia K
    Pediatr Dent; 1999; 21(4):231-4. PubMed ID: 10436476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Micromorphological evaluation of posterior composite restorations - a 10-year report.
    Gaengler P; Hoyer I; Montag R; Gaebler P
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Oct; 31(10):991-1000. PubMed ID: 15387840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Potential of restorative systems with simplified adhesives: quantitative analysis of wear and marginal adaptation in vitro.
    Göhring TN; Schönenberger KA; Lutz F
    Am J Dent; 2003 Aug; 16(4):275-82. PubMed ID: 14579884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Clinical evaluation of Class II combined amalgam-composite restorations in primary molars after 6 to 30 months.
    Holan G; Chosack A; Eidelman E
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1996; 63(5):341-5. PubMed ID: 8958346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for a period of 3 years.
    Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
    Quintessence Int; 2005 May; 36(5):365-72. PubMed ID: 15892534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part II: in vivo investigations.
    Krämer N; García-Godoy F; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2005 Apr; 18(2):75-81. PubMed ID: 15973822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of composite indirect restorations bonded to dentin treated with adhesive and low-viscosity composite.
    de Andrade OS; de Goes MF; Montes MA
    Dent Mater; 2007 Mar; 23(3):279-87. PubMed ID: 16546249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effect of placement techniques on the marginal adaptation of Class V composite restorations.
    Sensi LG; Marson FC; Baratieri LN; Monteiro Junior S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2005 Nov; 6(4):17-25. PubMed ID: 16299603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Clinical evaluation of different posterior resin composite materials: a 7-year report.
    Türkün LS; Aktener BO; Ateş M
    Quintessence Int; 2003 Jun; 34(6):418-26. PubMed ID: 12859086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Fatigue behavior of the resin-resin bond of partially replaced resin-based composite restorations.
    Frankenberger R; Krämer N; Ebert J; Lohbauer U; Käppel S; ten Weges S; Petschelt A
    Am J Dent; 2003 Feb; 16(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 12744407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Wear of composite resins in permanent posterior teeth.
    Swift EJ
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1987 Oct; 115(4):584-8. PubMed ID: 3309000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. In vivo evaluation of occlusal wear of two experimental composites versus amalgam.
    Hirt T; Lutz F; Roulet JF
    J Oral Rehabil; 1984 Nov; 11(6):511-20. PubMed ID: 6595375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.