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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2656763)

  • 1. The effect of ultrasonic cleaning and air polishing on the marginal integrity of radicular amalgam and composite resin restorations. An in vitro study.
    Gorfil C; Nordenberg D; Liberman R; Ben-Amar A
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Mar; 16(3):137-9. PubMed ID: 2656763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Surface wear on cervical restorations and adjacent enamel and root cementum caused by simulated long-term maintenance therapy.
    Rühling A; Wulf J; Schwahn C; Kocher T
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Apr; 31(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 15016258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Influence of Hand Instrumentation and Ultrasonic Scaling on the Microleakage of various Cervical Restorations: An in vitro Study.
    Rohani B; Barekatain M; Farhad SZ; Haghayegh N
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2017 Jun; 18(6):437-442. PubMed ID: 28621270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of ultrasonic scaling on the surface of Class V amalgam restorations--a scanning electron microscopy study.
    Rajstein J; Tal M
    J Oral Rehabil; 1984 May; 11(3):299-305. PubMed ID: 6376740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. SEM and microleakage evaluation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations with or without the use of a light-curable coating material and of polishing.
    Magni E; Zhang L; Hickel R; Bossù M; Polimeni A; Ferrari M
    J Dent; 2008 Nov; 36(11):885-91. PubMed ID: 18757129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of two different polishing techniques on microleakage of new composites in Class V restorations.
    Yalçin F; Korkmaz Y; Başeren M
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Nov; 7(5):18-25. PubMed ID: 17091136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Alternative technique for class V resin composite restorations with minimum finishing/polishing procedures.
    Perez CR
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(3):375-9. PubMed ID: 20533640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of finishing/polishing techniques on microleakage of resin-modified glass ilonomer cement restorations.
    Yap AU; Yap WY; Yeo EJ; Tan JW; Ong DS
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(1):36-41. PubMed ID: 12540116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effect of occlusal loading on the microleakage of class V restorations.
    Arisu HD; Uçtasli MB; Eligüzeloglu E; Ozcan S; Omürlü H
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(2):135-41. PubMed ID: 18435186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of different restorative techniques on microleakage in Class II cavities with gingival wall in cementum.
    Demarco FF; Ramos OL; Mota CS; Formolo E; Justino LM
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):253-9. PubMed ID: 11357567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of thickness of flowable resins on marginal leakage in class II composite restorations.
    Malmström HS; Schlueter M; Roach T; Moss ME
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):373-80. PubMed ID: 12120775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of new generation surface sealants on the marginal permeability of Class V resin composite restorations.
    Owens BM; Johnson WW
    Oper Dent; 2006; 31(4):481-8. PubMed ID: 16924989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations.
    Toledano M; Osorio E; Osorio R; García-Godoy F
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 May; 81(5):610-5. PubMed ID: 10220667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. In vivo and in vitro evaluations of microleakage around Class I amalgam and composite restorations.
    Alptekin T; Ozer F; Unlu N; Cobanoglu N; Blatz MB
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):641-8. PubMed ID: 21180003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The comparison of the effects of three types of piezoelectric ultrasonic tips and air polishing system on the filling materials: an in vitro study.
    Arabaci T; Ciçek Y; Ozgöz M; Canakçi V; Canakçi CF; Eltas A
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2007 Nov; 5(4):205-10. PubMed ID: 17927632
    [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. Assessing microleakage in resin composite restorations rebonded with a surface sealant and three low-viscosity resin systems.
    Ramos RP; Chinelatti MA; Chimello DT; Dibb RG
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Jun; 33(6):450-6. PubMed ID: 12073726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Amalgam repair: quantitative evaluation of amalgam-resin and resin-tooth interfaces with different surface treatments.
    Cehreli SB; Arhun N; Celik C
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(3):337-44. PubMed ID: 20533635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of light source position and bevel placement on facial margin adaptation of resin-based composite restorations.
    Hoelscher DC; Gregory WA; Linger JB; Pink FE
    Am J Dent; 2000 Aug; 13(4):171-5. PubMed ID: 11763925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Class II restorations with margins below the CEJ.
    Kanca J; Greitzer G
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2009; 21(3):193-201. PubMed ID: 19508264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.