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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21840585)

  • 1. Clinical performance of a new glass ionomer based restoration system: a retrospective cohort study.
    Friedl K; Hiller KA; Friedl KH
    Dent Mater; 2011 Oct; 27(10):1031-7. PubMed ID: 21840585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical failure of class-II restorations of a highly viscous glass-ionomer material over a 6-year period: a retrospective study.
    Scholtanus JD; Huysmans MC
    J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):156-62. PubMed ID: 16973253
    [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. 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]  

  • 5. Effect of spherical silica additions on marginal gaps and compressive strength of experimental glass-ionomer cements.
    Irie M; Nagaoka N; Tamada Y; Maruo Y; Nishigawa G; Minagi S; Finger WJ
    Am J Dent; 2011 Oct; 24(5):310-4. PubMed ID: 22165460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Tooth-colored filling materials for the restoration of cervical lesions: a 24-month follow-up study.
    Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hinkel R
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):251-8. PubMed ID: 11203827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth.
    Huth KC; Manhart J; Selbertinger A; Paschos E; Kaaden C; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
    Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 15241910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-month results.
    Alves dos Santos MP; Luiz RR; Maia LC
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):451-9. PubMed ID: 20188783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
    Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of a glass ionomer cement in primary molars.
    Rutar J; McAllan L; Tyas MJ
    Pediatr Dent; 2000; 22(6):486-8. PubMed ID: 11132508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Enamel remineralization on teeth adjacent to Class II glass ionomer restorations.
    Segura A; Donly KJ; Stratmann RG
    Am J Dent; 1997 Oct; 10(5):247-50. PubMed ID: 9522700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. A one-year clinical evaluation of a high-viscosity glass ionomer cement in primary molars.
    Yilmaz Y; Eyuboglu O; Kocogullari ME; Belduz N
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Feb; 7(1):71-8. PubMed ID: 16491149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Three-year clinical performance of a compomer in stress-bearing restorations in permanent posterior teeth.
    Huth KC; Manhard J; Hickel R; Kunzelmann KH
    Am J Dent; 2003 Aug; 16(4):255-9. PubMed ID: 14579881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations in primary molars.
    Folkesson UH; Andersson-Wenckert IE; van Dijken JW
    Swed Dent J; 1999; 23(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 10371000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessment of glass polyalkenoate restorations in primary molar teeth.
    Attwood D; Reid JS; Evans D
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1994 Jun; 2(4):183-5. PubMed ID: 8603144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Occlusal glass ionomer cermet, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations: a 2-year clinical study.
    Lidums A; Wilkie R; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 7803005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of postoperative bleaching on marginal leakage of resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer restorations at different delayed periods of exposure to carbamide peroxide.
    Moosavi H; Ghavamnasiri M; Manari V
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 Nov; 10(6):E009-16. PubMed ID: 20020076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.