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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3270041)

  • 21. Composite resin-amalgam compound restorations.
    Franchi M; Trisi P; Montanari G; Piattelli A
    Quintessence Int; 1994 Aug; 25(8):577-82. PubMed ID: 7568708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Practical posterior composites. Efficient placement and predictable results.
    Griffin JD
    Dent Today; 2003 Feb; 22(2):112-7. PubMed ID: 12680270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A method to reduce or prevent postoperative sensitivity with posterior composite resin restorations.
    Weltch FH; Eick JD
    Quintessence Int; 1986 Oct; 17(10):667-76. PubMed ID: 3466197
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Materials for conservative posterior restorations.
    Donovan TE; Cho GC
    J Calif Dent Assoc; 1996 Sep; 24(9):32-8. PubMed ID: 9120610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Can current composites be used for Class I and II restorations in posterior teeth?].
    Baldensperger R
    Rev Odontostomatol (Paris); 1985; 14(3):175-82. PubMed ID: 3866285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Posterior composites for modern operative dentistry.
    Douglas WH
    J Calif Dent Assoc; 1996 Sep; 24(9):44-7. PubMed ID: 9120612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Microleakage of root caries restorations.
    Herrin KH; Shen C
    Gerodontics; 1985 Aug; 1(4):156-9. PubMed ID: 3864708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effect of pulp protection technique on the clinical performance of amalgam restorations: three-year results.
    Baratieri LN; Machado A; Van Noort R; Ritter AV; Baratieri NM
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):319-24. PubMed ID: 12120767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Amalgam restorations: postoperative sensitivity as a function of liner treatment and cavity depth.
    Gordan VV; Mjör IA; Moorhead JE
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(6):377-83. PubMed ID: 10823088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Clinical evaluation of composite restorations on the posterior teeth after 4 years].
    Prati C; Montanari G
    Minerva Stomatol; 1987 Oct; 36(10):765-9. PubMed ID: 3480412
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Amalgam. VIII. Substitute for amalgam: the biocompatibility of composite restorations].
    Schuurs AH; van Amerongen JP
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1993 Sep; 100(9):389-91. PubMed ID: 11822149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Treating patients with CARE (comfortable aesthetic restorations): reducing postoperative sensitivity in direct posterior composite restorations.
    Ward DH
    Dent Today; 2004 Aug; 23(8):60, 62, 64-5. PubMed ID: 15354708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Bond strength and clinical evaluation of a new dentinal bonding agent to amalgam and resin composite.
    Olmez A; Ulusu T
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Nov; 26(11):785-93. PubMed ID: 8628838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of proximal contacts of posterior composite restorations with 4 placement techniques.
    El-Badrawy WA; Leung BW; El-Mowafy O; Rubo JH; Rubo MH
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2003 Mar; 69(3):162-7. PubMed ID: 12622881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Bioaesthetic ceromer restorations for the replacement of existing posterior amalgam restorations.
    Ahmad I
    Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent; 1998 May; 10(4):416-8, 420. PubMed ID: 9655048
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Informed consent: direct posterior composite versus amalgam.
    Dlugokinski M; Browning WD
    J Am Coll Dent; 2001; 68(2):31-40. PubMed ID: 11764638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Posterior composite resin restorations--a review of clinical problems.
    Bryant RW
    Aust Prosthodont J; 1987; 1():41-50. PubMed ID: 3333226
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [General health damage by restorations of composite].
    Schuurs AH; van Amerongen JP
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1996 Nov; 103(11):444-7. PubMed ID: 11921987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A high-density posterior composite used for an amalgam replacement.
    Adams TC
    Dent Today; 1999 Feb; 18(2):74-7. PubMed ID: 10765814
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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