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 *

275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21801799)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. One-year clinical performance of self-etch adhesives in posterior restorations.
    Perdigão J; Dutra-Corrêa M; Castilhos N; Carmo AR; Anauate-Netto C; Cordeiro HJ; Amore R; Lewgoy HR
    Am J Dent; 2007 Apr; 20(2):125-33. PubMed ID: 17542208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of immediate dentin sealing on the marginal adaptation and bond strengths of total-etch and self-etch adhesives.
    Duarte S; de Freitas CR; Saad JR; Sadan A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Jul; 102(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 19573687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Marginal adaption of Class V restorations with and without "softstart-polymerization".
    Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Hiller KA; Märkl A
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 11203787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Microleakage of ceramic inlays luted with different resin cements and dentin adhesives.
    Uludag B; Ozturk O; Ozturk AN
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Oct; 102(4):235-41. PubMed ID: 19782826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Flowable composites as "filled adhesives:" a microleakage study.
    Sensi LG; Marson FC; Monteiro S; Baratieri LN; Caldeira de Andrada MA
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2004 Nov; 5(4):32-41. PubMed ID: 15558088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. SEM analysis of marginal expansion and gap formation in Class II composite restorations.
    Thonemann BM; Federlin M; Schmalz G; Hiller KA
    Dent Mater; 1997 May; 13(3):192-7. PubMed ID: 9758974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Chairside vs. labside ceramic inlays: effect of temporary restoration and adhesive luting on enamel cracks and marginal integrity.
    Frankenberger R; Krämer N; Appelt A; Lohbauer U; Naumann M; Roggendorf MJ
    Dent Mater; 2011 Sep; 27(9):892-8. PubMed ID: 21708404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations.
    Stavridakis MM; Kakaboura AI; Ardu S; Krejci I
    Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 17910230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Influence of proximal box elevation technique on marginal integrity of adhesively luted Cerec inlays.
    Müller V; Friedl KH; Friedl K; Hahnel S; Handel G; Lang R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Mar; 21(2):607-612. PubMed ID: 27507168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Marginal adaptation of resin-bonded light-cured glass ionomers in dentin cavities.
    Fritz UB; Finger WJ; Uno S
    Am J Dent; 1996 Dec; 9(6):253-8. PubMed ID: 9545879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effect of curing unit and adhesive system on marginal adaptation of composite restorations.
    Casselli DS; Faria-e-Silva AL; Casselli H; Martins LR
    Gen Dent; 2012; 60(6):e408-12. PubMed ID: 23220321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Enamel margin integrity of Class I one-bottle all-in-one adhesives-based restorations.
    Blunck U; Zaslansky P
    J Adhes Dent; 2011 Feb; 13(1):23-9. PubMed ID: 21403933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effect of additional enamel etching and a flowable composite to the interfacial integrity of Class II adhesive composite restorations.
    Belli S; Inokoshi S; Ozer F; Pereira PN; Ogata M; Tagami J
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):70-5. PubMed ID: 11203780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Class II resin composite restorations-tunnel vs. box-only in vitro and in vivo.
    Preusse PJ; Winter J; Amend S; Roggendorf MJ; Dudek MC; Krämer N; Frankenberger R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2021 Feb; 25(2):737-744. PubMed ID: 33169273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Influence of marginal bevels on microleakage around Class V cavities bonded with seven self-etching agents.
    Santini A; Ivanovic V; Ibbetson R; Milia E
    Am J Dent; 2004 Aug; 17(4):257-61. PubMed ID: 15478487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Influence of curing methods and matrix type on the marginal seal of class II resin-based composite restorations in vitro.
    Hofmann N; Hunecke A
    Oper Dent; 2006; 31(1):97-105. PubMed ID: 16536200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations.
    Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Hiller KA; Mortazavi F
    Oper Dent; 1997; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 9227124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of occlusal loading on the microleakage of class V restorations.
    Arisu HD; Uçtasli MB; Eligüzeloglu E; Ozcan S; Omürlü H
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(2):135-41. PubMed ID: 18435186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Pit and fissure sealing. Bonding of bulk-cured, low-filled, light-curing resins to bacteria-contaminated uncut enamel in high c-factor cavities.
    Tay FR; Frankenberger R; Carvalho RM; Pashley DH
    Am J Dent; 2005 Feb; 18(1):28-36. PubMed ID: 15810478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.