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 *

313 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21554920)

  • 1. Clinical study of indirect composite resin inlays in posterior stress-bearing cavities placed by dental students: results after 4 years.
    Huth KC; Chen HY; Mehl A; Hickel R; Manhart J
    J Dent; 2011 Jul; 39(7):478-88. PubMed ID: 21554920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical study of indirect composite resin inlays in posterior stress-bearing preparations placed by dental students: results after 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years.
    Manhart J; Chen HY; Mehl A; Hickel R
    Quintessence Int; 2010 May; 41(5):399-410. PubMed ID: 20376376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Three-year clinical evaluation of composite and ceramic inlays.
    Manhart J; Chen HY; Neuerer P; Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A; Hickel R
    Am J Dent; 2001 Apr; 14(2):95-9. PubMed ID: 11507807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth.
    Manhart J; Neuerer P; Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A; Hickel R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Sep; 84(3):289-96. PubMed ID: 11005901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Operator vs. material influence on clinical outcome of bonded ceramic inlays.
    Frankenberger R; Reinelt C; Petschelt A; Krämer N
    Dent Mater; 2009 Aug; 25(8):960-8. PubMed ID: 19344946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Four-year clinical performance and marginal analysis of pressed glass ceramic inlays luted with ormocer restorative vs. conventional luting composite.
    Krämer N; Reinelt C; Richter G; Frankenberger R
    J Dent; 2009 Nov; 37(11):813-9. PubMed ID: 19744761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A 10-year prospective evaluation of CAD/CAM-manufactured (Cerec) ceramic inlays cemented with a chemically cured or dual-cured resin composite.
    Sjögren G; Molin M; van Dijken JW
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(2):241-6. PubMed ID: 15119879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Nanohybrid composite vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: clinical and microscopic results after 2 years.
    Krämer N; Reinelt C; García-Godoy F; Taschner M; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2009 Aug; 22(4):228-34. PubMed ID: 19824560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: clinical results and margin analysis after four years.
    Krämer N; Reinelt C; Richter G; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
    Dent Mater; 2009 Jun; 25(6):750-9. PubMed ID: 19237189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: two-year clinical follow up.
    Coelho Santos MJ; Mondelli RF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 15088722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A clinical comparison of resin composite inlay and onlay posterior restorations and cast-gold restorations at 7 years.
    Donly KJ; Jensen ME; Triolo P; Chan D
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Mar; 30(3):163-8. PubMed ID: 10356568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaptation: direct composite resins vs ceramic inlays.
    Frankenberger R; Sindel J; Krämer N; Petschelt A
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):147-55. PubMed ID: 10530276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Evaluation of occlusal marginal adaptation of Class II resin composite inlays.
    Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Gruythuysen RJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1994; 61(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 8182195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Short-term clinical evaluation of inlay and onlay restorations made with a ceromer.
    Monaco C; Baldissara P; dall'Orologio GD; Scotti R
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(1):81-6. PubMed ID: 11842911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: five-year follow-up.
    Santos MJ; Mondelli RF; Navarro MF; Francischone CE; Rubo JH; Santos GC
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 22856680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.