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 *

227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3479490)

  • 1. Clinical performance of sealed composite restorations placed over caries compared with sealed and unsealed amalgam restorations.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Call-Smith KM; Shuster GS; Williams JE; Davis QB; Smith CD; Bell RA; Sherrer JD; Myers DR; Morse PK
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1987 Nov; 115(5):689-94. PubMed ID: 3479490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cariostatic and ultraconservative sealed restorations: six-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Smith CD; Williams JE; Sherrer JD; Mackert JR; Richards EE; Schuster GS; O'Dell NL; Pierce KL; Kovarik RE
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Dec; 23(12):827-38. PubMed ID: 1305301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sealed restorations: 5-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Richards EE; Williams JE; Smith CD; Mackert JR; Schuster GS; Sherrer JD; O'Dell NL; Pierce KL; Wenner KK
    Am J Dent; 1992 Feb; 5(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 1524744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Ultraconservative and cariostatic sealed restorations: results at year 10.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Curtis JW; Ergle JW; Rueggeberg FA; Adair SM
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1998 Jan; 129(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 9448347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cariostatic and ultraconservative sealed restorations: nine-year results among children and adults.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Adair SM; Sams DR; Curtis JW; Ergle JW; Hawkins KI; Mackert JR; O'Dell NL; Richards EE; Rueggeberg F
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1995; 62(2):97-107. PubMed ID: 7608378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sealed restorations: 4-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Williams JE; Pierce KL; Smith CD; Schuster GS; Mackert JR; Sherrer JD; Wenner KK; Richards EE; Davis QB
    Am J Dent; 1991 Feb; 4(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 2003895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ultraconservative sealed restorations: three-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Williams JE; Schuster GS; Smith CD; Pierce KL; Mackert JR; Sherrer JD; Wenner KK; Davis QB; Garman TA
    J Public Health Dent; 1991; 51(4):239-50. PubMed ID: 1941777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Microleakage and wall adaptation of conservative restorations.
    Guelmann M; Bonnin S; Primosch RE; Söderholm KJ
    Am J Dent; 2002 Dec; 15(6):407-11. PubMed ID: 12691279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The management of occlusal caries in permanent molars. A clinical trial comparing a minimal composite restoration with an occlusal amalgam restoration.
    Walls AW; Murray JJ; McCabe JF
    Br Dent J; 1988 May; 164(9):288-92. PubMed ID: 3164204
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Caries preventive effect of occlusal sealant extension to ART restorations compared with non-extended amalgam restorations.
    Frencken JE; van 't Hof MA; Taifour D
    Oral Health Prev Dent; 2007; 5(1):55-61. PubMed ID: 17366762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The sealant restoration: indications, success and clinical technique.
    Hassall DC; Mellor AC
    Br Dent J; 2001 Oct; 191(7):358-62. PubMed ID: 11697597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Changes in Occlusal Caries Lesion Management in France from 2002 to 2012: A Persistent Gap between Evidence and Clinical Practice.
    Doméjean S; Léger S; Maltrait M; Espelid I; Tveit AB; Tubert-Jeannin S
    Caries Res; 2015; 49(4):408-16. PubMed ID: 26112375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Factors influencing dentists' choice of amalgam and tooth-colored restorative materials for Class II preparations in younger patients.
    Vidnes-Kopperud S; Tveit AB; Gaarden T; Sandvik L; Espelid I
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2009; 67(2):74-9. PubMed ID: 19085213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Preventive resin restorations vs. amalgam restorations: a three-year clinical study.
    Cloyd S; Gilpatrick RO; Moore D
    J Tenn Dent Assoc; 1997 Oct; 77(4):36-40. PubMed ID: 9520761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Six-year success rates of occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed using three minimal intervention approaches.
    Mandari GJ; Frencken JE; van't Hof MA
    Caries Res; 2003; 37(4):246-53. PubMed ID: 12771499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Alternative treatments for resin-based composite and amalgam restorations with marginal defects: a 12-month clinical trial.
    Moncada GC; Martin J; Fernandez E; Vildosola PG; Caamano C; Caro MJ; Mjor IA; Gordan VV
    Gen Dent; 2006; 54(5):314-8. PubMed ID: 17004564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Composite resin support of undermined enamel in amalgam restorations.
    Eidelman E
    Pediatr Dent; 1999; 21(2):118-20. PubMed ID: 10197337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Mixed amalgam-composite restorations].
    Dallari A; Rovatti L
    Attual Dent; 1987 Apr; 3(14):10-1, 13-9. PubMed ID: 3477241
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Decisions of practitioners regarding placement of amalgam and composite restorations in general practice settings.
    Pink FE; Minden NJ; Simmonds S
    Oper Dent; 1994; 19(4):127-32. PubMed ID: 9028231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The preventive resin restoration: a conservative alternative.
    McConnachie I
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1992 Mar; 58(3):197-200. PubMed ID: 1555123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.