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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27011734)

  • 21. The integrity of bonded amalgam restorations: a clinical evaluation after five years.
    Mach Z; Regent J; Staninec M; Mrklas L; Setcos JC
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2002 Apr; 133(4):460-7; quiz 493. PubMed ID: 11991463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive agents with dye under vacuum: an in vitro study.
    Parolia A; Kundabala M; Gupta V; Verma M; Batra C; Shenoy R; Srikant N
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(2):252-5. PubMed ID: 21891895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [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]  

  • 25. Increasing the longevity of restorations by minimal intervention: a two-year clinical trial.
    Moncada G; Fernández E; Martín J; Arancibia C; Mjör IA; Gordan VV
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(3):258-64. PubMed ID: 18505215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Two-year performance of CAD/CAM fabricated resin composite inlay restorations: A randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Tunac AT; Celik EU; Yasa B
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2019 Nov; 31(6):627-638. PubMed ID: 31631500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A 15-year randomized controlled study of a reduced shrinkage stress resin composite.
    van Dijken JW; Lindberg A
    Dent Mater; 2015 Sep; 31(9):1150-8. PubMed ID: 26205382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings.
    Collins CJ; Bryant RW; Hodge KL
    J Dent; 1998 May; 26(4):311-7. PubMed ID: 9611936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations.
    Johnson GH; Bales DJ; Gordon GE; Powell LV
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Oct; 23(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 1289954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The frequency of replacement of dental restorations may vary based on a number of variables, including type of material, size of the restoration, and caries risk of the patient.
    Roumanas ED
    J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 10(1):23-4. PubMed ID: 20230960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Curriculum time compared to clinical procedures in amalgam and composite posterior restorations in U.S. dental schools: a preliminary study.
    Rey R; Nimmo S; Childs GS; Behar-Horenstein LS
    J Dent Educ; 2015 Mar; 79(3):331-6. PubMed ID: 25729027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effect of Refurbishing Amalgam and Resin Composite Restorations After 12 Years: Controlled Clinical Trial.
    Estay J; Martín J; Vildosola P; Mjor IA; Oliveira OB; Andrade MF; Moncada G; Gordan VV; Fernández E
    Oper Dent; 2017; 42(6):587-595. PubMed ID: 28857709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Frequency of restoration replacement in posterior teeth for U.S. Navy and Marine Corps personnel.
    Laccabue M; Ahlf RL; Simecek JW
    Oper Dent; 2014; 39(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 23802636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: a five-year follow-up.
    Fagundes TC; Barata TJ; Carvalho CA; Franco EB; van Dijken JW; Navarro MF
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Apr; 140(4):447-54. PubMed ID: 19339534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A clinical evaluation of occlusal composite and amalgam restorations: one- and two-year results.
    Gibson GB; Richardson AS; Patton RE; Waldman R
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1982 Mar; 104(3):335-7. PubMed ID: 6949980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Adhesively bonded versus non-bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries.
    Fedorowicz Z; Nasser M; Wilson N
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2009 Oct; (4):CD007517. PubMed ID: 19821423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for posterior teeth after 3 years.
    Ernst CP; Martin M; Stuff S; Willershausen B
    Clin Oral Investig; 2001 Sep; 5(3):148-55. PubMed ID: 11642558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light.
    Pflaum T; Kranz S; Montag R; Güntsch A; Völpel A; Mills R; Jandt K; Sigusch B
    Clin Oral Investig; 2018 May; 22(4):1651-1662. PubMed ID: 29080928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical performance and margin analysis of ariston pHc versus Solitaire I as posterior restorations after 1 year.
    Braun AR; Frankenberger R; Krämer N
    Clin Oral Investig; 2001 Sep; 5(3):139-47. PubMed ID: 11642557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 24-Month Clinical Evaluation of Different Bulk-Fill Restorative Resins in Class II Restorations.
    Guney T; Yazici AR
    Oper Dent; 2020; 45(2):123-133. PubMed ID: 31693438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.