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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26752876)

  • 1. Comparative evaluation of surface properties of enamel and different esthetic restorative materials under erosive and abrasive challenges: An in vitro study.
    Kaur S; Makkar S; Kumar R; Pasricha S; Gupta P
    Indian J Dent; 2015; 6(4):172-80. PubMed ID: 26752876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Erosion and abrasion of tooth-colored restorative materials and human enamel.
    Yu H; Wegehaupt FJ; Wiegand A; Roos M; Attin T; Buchalla W
    J Dent; 2009 Dec; 37(12):913-22. PubMed ID: 19674824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Susceptibility of restorations and adjacent enamel/dentine to erosion under different salivary flow conditions.
    Alghilan MA; Cook NB; Platt JA; Eckert GJ; Hara AT
    J Dent; 2015 Dec; 43(12):1476-82. PubMed ID: 26476416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of different toothpastes on the prevention of erosion in composite resin and glass ionomer cement enamel and dentin restorations.
    Moda MD; Briso ALF; Oliveira RP; Pini NIP; GonÇalves DFM; Santos PHD; Fagundes TC
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2020; 28():e20200493. PubMed ID: 32997089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Are S-PRG composites able to resist against erosive and abrasive challenges and protect surrounding enamel in situ?
    Martins DDS; Pegatin GM; Bergantin BTP; Leone CCLD; Boteon AP; Wang L; Rios D; Honório HM
    J Dent; 2024 Mar; 142():104874. PubMed ID: 38307488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro wear rates of materials under different loads and varying pH.
    Shabanian M; Richards LC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Jun; 87(6):650-6. PubMed ID: 12131888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bioactive Materials Subjected to Erosion/Abrasion and Their Influence on Dental Tissues.
    Viana Í; Alania Y; Feitosa S; Borges AB; Braga RR; Scaramucci T
    Oper Dent; 2020; 45(3):E114-E123. PubMed ID: 32053454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An in vitro comparison of the effects of various air polishing powders on enamel and selected esthetic restorative materials.
    Barnes CM; Covey D; Watanabe H; Simetich B; Schulte JR; Chen H
    J Clin Dent; 2014; 25(4):76-87. PubMed ID: 26054183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Chemical and morphological evaluation of enamel and dentin near cavities restored with conventional and zirconia modified glass ionomer subjected to erosion-abrasion.
    Soares LES; Melo TMTC; de Sá Brandim A; de Oliveira IR
    Microsc Res Tech; 2019 Jul; 82(7):1114-1126. PubMed ID: 30907056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Randomized clinical trial of two resin-modified glass ionomer materials: 1-year results.
    Perdigão J; Dutra-Corrêa M; Saraceni SH; Ciaramicoli MT; Kiyan VH
    Oper Dent; 2012; 37(6):591-601. PubMed ID: 22770485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of three bleaching agents on the surface properties of three different esthetic restorative materials.
    Turker SB; Biskin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 May; 89(5):466-73. PubMed ID: 12806324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Microhardness of different esthetic restorative materials: Evaluation and comparison after exposure to acidic drink.
    Poggio C; Viola M; Mirando M; Chiesa M; Beltrami R; Colombo M
    Dent Res J (Isfahan); 2018; 15(3):166-172. PubMed ID: 29922334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of the wear resistance of new nanocomposite resin restorative materials.
    Yesil ZD; Alapati S; Johnston W; Seghi RR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Jun; 99(6):435-43. PubMed ID: 18514665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of erosive pH cycling on different restorative materials and on enamel restored with these materials.
    Francisconi LF; Honório HM; Rios D; Magalhães AC; Machado MA; Buzalaf MA
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(2):203-8. PubMed ID: 18435196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of finishing technique on the microleakage and surface texture of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials.
    Wilder AD; Swift EJ; May KN; Thompson JY; McDougal RA
    J Dent; 2000 Jul; 28(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 10785304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. In situ effect of an erosive challenge on different restorative materials and on enamel adjacent to these materials.
    Rios D; Honório HM; Francisconi LF; Magalhães AC; de Andrade Moreira Machado MA; Buzalaf MA
    J Dent; 2008 Feb; 36(2):152-7. PubMed ID: 18191012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effectiveness of resin-based materials against erosive and abrasive enamel wear.
    Zhao X; Pan J; Zhang S; Malmstrom HS; Ren YF
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Jan; 21(1):463-468. PubMed ID: 27059993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of chemical and mechanical degradation on surface roughness of three glass ionomers and a nanofilled resin composite.
    Carvalho FG; Sampaio CS; Fucio SB; Carlo HL; Correr-Sobrinho L; Puppin-Rontani RM
    Oper Dent; 2012; 37(5):509-17. PubMed ID: 22433031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mineral loss on adjacent enamel glass ionomer cements restorations after cariogenic and erosive challenges.
    Salas CF; Guglielmi CA; Raggio DP; Mendes FM
    Arch Oral Biol; 2011 Oct; 56(10):1014-9. PubMed ID: 21489401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparative Evaluation of Microhardness by Common Drinks on Esthetic Restorative Materials and Enamel: An
    Gupta R; Madan M; Dua P; Saini S; Mangla R; Kainthla T; Dupper A
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2018; 11(3):155-160. PubMed ID: 30131633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.