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 *

444 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23496025)

  • 1. Direct composite restorations for the worn mandibular anterior dentition: a 7-year follow-up of a prospective randomised controlled split-mouth clinical trial.
    Al-Khayatt AS; Ray-Chaudhuri A; Poyser NJ; Briggs PF; Porter RW; Kelleher MG; Eliyas S
    J Oral Rehabil; 2013 May; 40(5):389-401. PubMed ID: 23496025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Survival analysis of composite Dahl restorations provided to manage localised anterior tooth wear (ten year follow-up).
    Gulamali AB; Hemmings KW; Tredwin CJ; Petrie A
    Br Dent J; 2011 Aug; 211(4):E9. PubMed ID: 21869770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The evaluation of direct composite restorations for the worn mandibular anterior dentition - clinical performance and patient satisfaction.
    Poyser NJ; Briggs PF; Chana HS; Kelleher MG; Porter RW; Patel MM
    J Oral Rehabil; 2007 May; 34(5):361-76. PubMed ID: 17441877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of pattern of failure of resin composite restorations in non-carious cervical lesions with and without occlusal wear facets.
    Oginni AO; Adeleke AA
    J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):824-30. PubMed ID: 24746714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Computer-aided designed/computer-assisted manufactured composite resin versus ceramic single-tooth restorations: a 3-year clinical study.
    Vanoorbeek S; Vandamme K; Lijnen I; Naert I
    Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(3):223-30. PubMed ID: 20552087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Three-year evaluation of posterior vertical bite reconstruction using direct resin composite--a case series.
    Schmidlin PR; Filli T; Imfeld C; Tepper S; Attin T
    Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):102-8. PubMed ID: 19192844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Four-year clinical evaluation of two self-etching dentin adhesives of different pH values used to restore non-retentive cervical lesions.
    Söderholm KJ; Ottenga M; Nimmo S
    Am J Dent; 2013 Feb; 26(1):28-32. PubMed ID: 23724546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
    Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
    Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recontouring teeth and closing diastemas with direct composite buildups: a 5-year follow-up.
    Frese C; Schiller P; Staehle HJ; Wolff D
    J Dent; 2013 Nov; 41(11):979-85. PubMed ID: 23954577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Two-year clinical performance of Clearfil SE and Clearfil S3 in restoration of unabraded non-carious class V lesions.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Franco G; Estrada BE; Brackett WW
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(3):273-8. PubMed ID: 20533626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Are there universal restorative composites for anterior and posterior teeth?
    Baldissera RA; Corrêa MB; Schuch HS; Collares K; Nascimento GG; Jardim PS; Moraes RR; Opdam NJ; Demarco FF
    J Dent; 2013 Nov; 41(11):1027-35. PubMed ID: 24001506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Adhesively restored anterior maxillary dentitions affected by severe erosion: up to 6-year results of a prospective clinical study.
    Vailati F; Gruetter L; Belser UC
    Eur J Esthet Dent; 2013; 8(4):506-30. PubMed ID: 24624375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
    Shi L; Wang X; Zhao Q; Zhang Y; Zhang L; Ren Y; Chen Z
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 20166406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Noncarious cervical lesions restored with three different tooth-colored materials: two-year results.
    Stojanac IL; Premovic MT; Ramic BD; Drobac MR; Stojsin IM; Petrovic LM
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(1):12-20. PubMed ID: 22856681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The survival of direct composite restorations in the management of severe tooth wear including attrition and erosion: A prospective 8-year study.
    Milosevic A; Burnside G
    J Dent; 2016 Jan; 44():13-9. PubMed ID: 26542166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of microhybrid, packable and nanofilled resin composites in Class I restorations.
    Sadeghi M; Lynch CD; Shahamat N
    J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Jul; 37(7):532-7. PubMed ID: 20202097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report.
    Gaengler P; Hoyer I; Montag R
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(2):185-94. PubMed ID: 11570687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.