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 *

363 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2639947)

  • 1. Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures.
    Reeh ES; Messer HH; Douglas WH
    J Endod; 1989 Nov; 15(11):512-6. PubMed ID: 2639947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of restorative procedures on the strength of endodontically treated molars.
    Linn J; Messer HH
    J Endod; 1994 Oct; 20(10):479-85. PubMed ID: 7714419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cuspal deflection of maxillary premolars restored with bonded amalgam.
    el-Badrawy WA
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(6):337-43. PubMed ID: 10823082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
    Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cuspal deflection, strain and microleakage of endodontically treated premolar teeth restored with direct resin composites.
    Taha NA; Palamara JE; Messer HH
    J Dent; 2009 Sep; 37(9):724-30. PubMed ID: 19581032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Mechanical resistance of endodontically treated upper first premolar crowns].
    Marcoli PA; Pasini S; Visconti L; Bellagamba F
    G Ital Endod; 1991; 5(1):23-5. PubMed ID: 1782437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fracture resistance of thermal cycled and endodontically treated premolars with adhesive restorations.
    de V Habekost L; Camacho GB; Azevedo EC; Demarco FF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Sep; 98(3):186-92. PubMed ID: 17854619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cuspal deflection in molars in relation to endodontic and restorative procedures.
    Panitvisai P; Messer HH
    J Endod; 1995 Feb; 21(2):57-61. PubMed ID: 7714437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Stiffness of endodontically-treated teeth related to restoration technique.
    Reeh ES; Douglas WH; Messer HH
    J Dent Res; 1989 Nov; 68(11):1540-4. PubMed ID: 2584522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of restorative procedures and occlusal loading on cuspal deflection.
    González-López S; De Haro-Gasquet F; Vílchez-Díaz MA; Ceballos L; Bravo M
    Oper Dent; 2006; 31(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 16536191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with direct and indirect adhesive techniques.
    Santos MJ; Bezerra RB
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2005 Sep; 71(8):585. PubMed ID: 16202199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Gomide HA; Araujo CA; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):114-22. PubMed ID: 18262012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reinforcement effect of polyethylene fibre in root-filled teeth: comparison of two restoration techniques.
    Belli S; Erdemir A; Yildirim C
    Int Endod J; 2006 Feb; 39(2):136-42. PubMed ID: 16454794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of amalgam bonding on the stiffness of teeth weakened by cavity preparation.
    Zidan O; Abdel-Keriem U
    Dent Mater; 2003 Nov; 19(7):680-5. PubMed ID: 12901995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of a new resin inlay/onlay restorative material on cuspal reinforcement.
    Lopes LM; Leitao JG; Douglas WH
    Quintessence Int; 1991 Aug; 22(8):641-5. PubMed ID: 1882059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The influence of cavity preparation design on fracture strength and mode of fracture of laboratory-processed composite resin restorations.
    Fonseca RB; Fernandes-Neto AJ; Correr-Sobrinho L; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Oct; 98(4):277-84. PubMed ID: 17936127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part I: fracture resistance and fracture mode.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Jan; 99(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 18182183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of restorative materials on cuspal flexure.
    Medige J; Deng Y; Yu X; Davis EL; Joynt RB
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Aug; 26(8):571-6. PubMed ID: 8602435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Identifying and reducing risks for potential fractures in endodontically treated teeth.
    Tang W; Wu Y; Smales RJ
    J Endod; 2010 Apr; 36(4):609-17. PubMed ID: 20307732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cumulative effects of successive restorative procedures on anterior crown flexure: intact versus veneered incisors.
    Magne P; Douglas WH
    Quintessence Int; 2000 Jan; 31(1):5-18. PubMed ID: 11203907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.