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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2637854)

  • 1. [In vitro studies on the quality of proximal margins of Cermet fillings in posterior teeth].
    Sauter M; Hickel R; Petschelt A; Raab W
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Sep; 44(9):717-9. PubMed ID: 2637854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Fracture resistance of teeth with Class 2 silver amalgam, posterior composite, and glass cermet restorations.
    Jagadish S; Yogesh BG
    Oper Dent; 1990; 15(2):42-7. PubMed ID: 2374743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative quantitative and qualitative assessment of the marginal adaptation and apposition of bonded amalgam restorations using luting glass ionomer and 4-META adhesive liner under a scanning electron microscope. An in vitro study.
    Abraham MM; Sudeep PT; Bhat KS
    Indian J Dent Res; 1999; 10(2):43-53. PubMed ID: 10865391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Marginal gaps of combined composite and glass ionomer cement fillings in different preparations in vitro].
    Reich E; Völkl H
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Jun; 44(6):421-5. PubMed ID: 2630263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Class II glass ionomer cermet tunnel, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations over 2 years.
    Wilkie R; Lidums A; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):181-4. PubMed ID: 7803004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. [Effect of surface treatment and thermal stress on the adaptation of Germadent amalgam fillings].
    Weiland M; Ullrich B; Borrmann S
    Zahn Mund Kieferheilkd Zentralbl; 1989; 77(2):134-8. PubMed ID: 2526436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Tunnel restorations using glass ionomer or glass cermet: in vitro marginal ridge fracture and microleakage.
    Shetty R; Munshi AK
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1996; 21(1):77-84. PubMed ID: 9161212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Cermet cements for milk tooth fillings. Preliminary results].
    Hickel R; Petschelt A; Voss A
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Jun; 44(6):444-5. PubMed ID: 2517110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [A study of different polishing techniques for amalgams and glass-cermet cement by scanning electron microscope (SEM)].
    Kakaboura A; Vougiouklakis G; Argiri G
    Hell Stomatol Chron; 1989; 33(4):217-25. PubMed ID: 2518600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lateral-access Class II restoration using resin-modified glass-ionomer or silver-cermet cement.
    Croll TP
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Feb; 26(2):121-6. PubMed ID: 7568722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Influence of different transitional restorations on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
    Qualtrough AJ; Cawte SG; Wilson NH
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical pilot study on new dental filling materials and preparation procedures in developing countries.
    Smith AJ; Chimimba PD; Kalf-Scholte S; Bouma J
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1990 Dec; 18(6):309-12. PubMed ID: 2090383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An in vitro assessment of cavity margin finishing and marginal adaptation of tunnel restorations.
    Chalker SA; Lumley PJ
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1993 Jun; 1(4):151-6. PubMed ID: 8268839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in small to moderate-sized Class II preparations of conventional design.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2000 May; 31(5):347-52. PubMed ID: 11203946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cuspal reinforcement in primary teeth: an in vitro comparison of three restorative materials.
    Donly KJ; Wild T; Jensen ME
    Pediatr Dent; 1988 Jun; 10(2):102-4. PubMed ID: 2978625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The use of liners under amalgam restorations: an in vitro study on marginal leakage.
    Marchiori S; Baratieri LN; de Andrada MA; Monteiro Júnior S; Ritter AV
    Quintessence Int; 1998 Oct; 29(10):637-42. PubMed ID: 9922761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Direct placement restorative materials for use in posterior teeth: the current options.
    Lyons K;
    N Z Dent J; 2003 Mar; 99(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 15330384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Marginal ridge fracture resistance, microleakage and pulpal response to glass ionomer/glass cermet partial tunnel restorations.
    Prabhu NT; Munshi AK; Shetty TR
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1997; 21(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 9484134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.