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 *

97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2150170)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Clinical comparison of Class V resin composite and glass ionomer restorations.
    Powell LV; Gordon GE; Johnson GH
    Am J Dent; 1992 Oct; 5(5):249-52. PubMed ID: 1299249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations.
    Brackett WW; Dib A; Brackett MG; Reyes AA; Estrada BE
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):477-81. PubMed ID: 14531590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [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]  

  • 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. Clinical evaluation of direct esthetic restorations in cervical abrasion/erosion lesions: one-year results.
    Powell LV; Gordon GE; Johnson GH
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Sep; 22(9):687-92. PubMed ID: 1835107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin.
    Barnes DM; Blank LW; Thompson VP; Holston AM; Gingell JC
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Feb; 22(2):143-51. PubMed ID: 2068249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Two-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material.
    Brackett WW; Gilpatrick RO; Browning WD; Gregory PN
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 10337292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Antibacterial activity of resin adhesives, glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer in contact with dentin caries samples.
    Herrera M; Castillo A; Bravo M; Liébana J; Carrión P
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):265-9. PubMed ID: 11203829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations.
    van Dijken JW
    Am J Dent; 1996 Oct; 9(5):195-8. PubMed ID: 9545903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Clinical assessment of glass ionomer cements as Class III restorations: a one-year report.
    Osborne JW; Berry TG
    Dent Mater; 1986 Aug; 2(4):147-50. PubMed ID: 2943622
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A clinical comparison of glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients.
    McComb D; Erickson RL; Maxymiw WG; Wood RE
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(5):430-7. PubMed ID: 12216559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Longevity of glass-ionomer restorative materials: results of a 10-year evaluation.
    Matis BA; Cochran M; Carlson T
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Jun; 27(6):373-82. PubMed ID: 8941830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months.
    Gao W; Peng D; Smales RJ; Yip KH
    Quintessence Int; 2003 Jan; 34(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 12674356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Marginal leakage around V-shaped cavities restored with glass-ionomer cements: an in vitro study.
    Zyskind D; Frenkel A; Fuks A; Hirschfeld Z
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Jan; 22(1):41-5. PubMed ID: 1838417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.