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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21998768)

  • 1. Retention of a Flowable Composite Resin in Comparison to a Conventional Resin-Based Sealant: One-year Follow-up.
    Jafarzadeh M; Malekafzali B; Tadayon N; Fallahi S
    J Dent (Tehran); 2010; 7(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 21998768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Randomized, controlled trial comparing the retention of a flowable restorative system with a conventional resin sealant: one-year follow up.
    Corona SA; Borsatto MC; Garcia L; Ramos RP; Palma-Dibb RG
    Int J Paediatr Dent; 2005 Jan; 15(1):44-50. PubMed ID: 15663444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical Evaluation of the Retention of Self-adhering Flowable Composite as Fissure Sealant in 6-9-year-old Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Bhuvaneswari P; Vinay C; Uloopi KS; RojaRamya KS; Chandrasekhar R; Chaitanya P
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2022; 15(3):322-326. PubMed ID: 35991800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Clinical comparison of a flowable composite and fissure sealant: a 24-month split-mouth, randomized, and controlled study.
    Erdemir U; Sancakli HS; Yaman BC; Ozel S; Yucel T; Yıldız E
    J Dent; 2014 Feb; 42(2):149-57. PubMed ID: 24296163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Application of fluoride releasing flowable resin in pit and fissure sealant of children with early enamel caries].
    Yan WJ; Zheng JJ; Chen XX
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2018 Oct; 50(5):911-914. PubMed ID: 30337757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Retention of pit and fissure sealant versus flowable composite: An
    Singh C; Kaur K; Kapoor K
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2019; 37(4):372-377. PubMed ID: 31710012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical evaluation of a medium-filled flowable restorative material as a pit and fissure sealant.
    Autio-Gold JT
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):325-9. PubMed ID: 12120768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of Different Fissure Sealant Materials and Flowable Composites Used as Pit-and-fissure Sealants: A 24-Month Clinical Trial.
    Kucukyilmaz E; Savas S
    Pediatr Dent; 2015; 37(5):468-73. PubMed ID: 26531092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Retention of flowable composite resins in comparison to pit and fissure sealants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Taneja S; Singh A
    Gen Dent; 2020; 68(4):50-55. PubMed ID: 32597778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. In Vitro Microleakage Comparison of Flowable Nanocomposites and Conventional Materials Used in Pit and Fissure Sealant Therapy.
    Arastoo S; Behbudi A; Rakhshan V
    Front Dent; 2019; 16(1):21-30. PubMed ID: 31608333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Clinical evaluation of pit and fissure sealant with light-cured flowable resin and light-cured pit and fissure sealants].
    Cao HZ; Shu CB; Wang S; Huang W
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2011 Oct; 20(5):545-7. PubMed ID: 22109377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative evaluation of a fissure sealant and a flowable composite: A 36-month split-mouth, randomized clinical study.
    Ozan G; Sancakli HS; Erdemir U; Yaman BC; Yildiz SO; Yildiz E
    J Dent; 2022 Aug; 123():104205. PubMed ID: 35724939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite and flowable compomer for preventive resin restorations.
    Qin M; Liu H
    Oper Dent; 2005; 30(5):580-7. PubMed ID: 16268391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative Clinical Evaluation of Resin-based Pit and Fissure Sealant and Self-adhering Flowable Composite: An
    Wadhwa S; A Nayak U; Kappadi D; Prajapati D; Sharma R; Pawar A
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2018; 11(5):430-434. PubMed ID: 30787558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Retention and remineralization effect of moisture tolerant resin-based sealant and glass ionomer sealant on non-cavitated pit and fissure caries: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Alsabek L; Al-Nerabieah Z; Bshara N; Comisi JC
    J Dent; 2019 Jul; 86():69-74. PubMed ID: 31136817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. One-year Clinical Evaluation of Retention Ability and Anticaries Effect of a Glass Ionomer-based and a Resin-based Fissure Sealant on Permanent First Molars: An
    Mathew SR; Narayanan RK; Vadekkepurayil K; Puthiyapurayil J
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2019; 12(6):553-559. PubMed ID: 32440074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Marginal Microleakage of Conventional Fissure Sealants and Self-Adhering Flowable Composite as Fissure Sealant in Permanent Teeth.
    Rahimian-Imam S; Ramazani N; Fayazi MR
    J Dent (Tehran); 2015 Jun; 12(6):430-5. PubMed ID: 26884777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of retention rates of fissure sealants using two flowable restorative materials and a conventional resin sealant: two-year follow-up.
    Oba AA; Sönmez IŞ; Ercan E; Dülgergil T
    Med Princ Pract; 2012; 21(3):234-7. PubMed ID: 22156663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical and antibacterial effectiveness of three different sealant materials.
    Amin HE
    J Dent Hyg; 2008; 82(5):45. PubMed ID: 19055885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of Retention between Conventional and Nanofilled Resin Sealants in a Paediatric Population: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Kamath V; Hebbal M; Ankola A; Sankeshwari R; Jalihal S; Choudhury A; Soliman M; Eldwakhly E
    J Clin Med; 2022 Jun; 11(12):. PubMed ID: 35743349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.