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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3458787)

  • 1. Posterior composite resins. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1986 May; 112(5):707-9. PubMed ID: 3458787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Controversies in posterior composite resin restorations.
    Wilson EG; Mandradjieff M; Brindock T
    Dent Clin North Am; 1990 Jan; 34(1):27-44. PubMed ID: 2403943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Class II glass ionomer cermet tunnel, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations over 2 years.
    Wilkie R; Lidums A; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):181-4. PubMed ID: 7803004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Direct placement restorative materials for use in posterior teeth: the current options.
    Lyons K;
    N Z Dent J; 2003 Mar; 99(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 15330384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Studies on posterior composite resins with special reference to class II restorations.
    Lundin SA
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1990; 73():1-41. PubMed ID: 2264013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Wear of composite resins in permanent posterior teeth.
    Swift EJ
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1987 Oct; 115(4):584-8. PubMed ID: 3309000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Occlusal glass ionomer cermet, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations: a 2-year clinical study.
    Lidums A; Wilkie R; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 7803005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Despite all--do we have an appropriate substitute for amalgam?].
    Levin L; Samorodnitzky-Naveh G; Coval M; Geiger SB
    Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993); 2008 Apr; 25(2):23-6, 73. PubMed ID: 18780542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Posterior composite resin restorations: operative innovations.
    Liebenberg WH
    Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent; 1996 Oct; 8(8):769-78; quiz 780. PubMed ID: 9242131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Three-year clinical evaluation of different restorative resins in class I restorations.
    Yazici AR; Ustunkol I; Ozgunaltay G; Dayangac B
    Oper Dent; 2014; 39(3):248-55. PubMed ID: 24754716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations.
    Deliperi S; Bardwell DN
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2006; 18(5):256-65; discussion 266-7. PubMed ID: 16987320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Evaluation of clinical performance of twelve posterior composite resins with a standardized placement technique.
    Barnes DM; Holston AM; Strassler HE; Shires PJ
    J Esthet Dent; 1990; 2(2):36-43. PubMed ID: 2098064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 2 years.
    Ernst CP; Buhtz C; Rissing C; Willershausen B
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2002 Aug; 23(8):711-4, 716-7, 720 passim; quiz 726. PubMed ID: 12244738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Posterior resin composite restorations: a new technique.
    Baratieri LN; Monteiro Júnior S; Correa M; Ritter AV
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Nov; 27(11):733-8. PubMed ID: 9161264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of wear and clinical performance between amalgam, composite and open sandwich restorations: 2-year results.
    Sachdeo A; Gray GB; Sulieman MA; Jagger DC
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2004 Mar; 12(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 15058177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of restoration size on the clinical performance of posterior "packable" resin composites over 18 months.
    Brackett WW; Browning WD; Brackett MG; Callan RS; Blalock JS
    Oper Dent; 2007; 32(3):212-6. PubMed ID: 17555171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.