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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25215344)

  • 1. Repair versus replacement of defective direct dental restorations in posterior teeth of adults.
    Blum IR; Lynch CD
    Prim Dent J; 2014 May; 3(2):62-7. PubMed ID: 25215344
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Defective dental restorations: to repair or not to repair? Part 1: direct composite restorations.
    Blum IR; Jagger DC; Wilson NH
    Dent Update; 2011 Mar; 38(2):78-80, 82-4. PubMed ID: 21500616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Repair or replacement of defective direct resin-based composite restorations: contemporary teaching in U.S. and Canadian dental schools.
    Lynch CD; Blum IR; Frazier KB; Haisch LD; Wilson NH
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2012 Feb; 143(2):157-63. PubMed ID: 22298557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Repair vs replacement of direct composite restorations: a survey of teaching and operative techniques in Oceania.
    Brunton PA; Ghazali A; Tarif ZH; Loch C; Lynch C; Wilson N; Blum IR
    J Dent; 2017 Apr; 59():62-67. PubMed ID: 28232082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Repair or replacement of restorations: do we accept built in obsolescence or do we improve the evidence?
    Sharif MO; Fedorowicz Z; Tickle M; Brunton PA
    Br Dent J; 2010 Aug; 209(4):171-4. PubMed ID: 20798721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Guidance on posterior resin composites: Academy of Operative Dentistry - European Section.
    Lynch CD; Opdam NJ; Hickel R; Brunton PA; Gurgan S; Kakaboura A; Shearer AC; Vanherle G; Wilson NH;
    J Dent; 2014 Apr; 42(4):377-83. PubMed ID: 24462699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
    Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
    J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The decision to repair or replace a defective restoration is affected by who placed the original restoration: findings from the National Dental PBRN.
    Gordan VV; Riley J; Geraldeli S; Williams OD; Spoto JC; Gilbert GH;
    J Dent; 2014 Dec; 42(12):1528-34. PubMed ID: 25223822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Repair versus replacement of defective composite restorations in dental schools in Germany.
    Blum IR; Lynch CD; Schriever A; Heidemann D; Wilson NH
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2011 Jun; 19(2):56-61. PubMed ID: 21780727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?].
    De Moor R; Delmé K
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure.
    Hickel R; Manhart J
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):45-64. PubMed ID: 11317384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended Class II cavities after six years.
    Krämer N; García-Godoy F; Reinelt C; Feilzer AJ; Frankenberger R
    Dent Mater; 2011 May; 27(5):455-64. PubMed ID: 21397316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 30-Month randomised clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a nanofill and a nanohybrid composite.
    de Andrade AK; Duarte RM; Medeiros e Silva FD; Batista AU; Lima KC; Pontual ML; Montes MA
    J Dent; 2011 Jan; 39(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 20888884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Minimal invasive treatment for defective restorations: five-year results using sealants.
    Martin J; Fernandez E; Estay J; Gordan VV; Mjor IA; Moncada G
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(2):125-33. PubMed ID: 22788726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials.
    Demarco FF; Corrêa MB; Cenci MS; Moraes RR; Opdam NJ
    Dent Mater; 2012 Jan; 28(1):87-101. PubMed ID: 22192253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation.
    Palotie U; Eronen AK; Vehkalahti K; Vehkalahti MM
    J Dent; 2017 Jul; 62():13-17. PubMed ID: 28529175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Teaching of direct posterior resin composite restorations in UK dental therapy training programmes.
    Lynch CD; Wilson NH
    Br Dent J; 2010 May; 208(9):415-21. PubMed ID: 20448613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.