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 *

317 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34930622)

  • 41. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Gomide HA; Araujo CA; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):114-22. PubMed ID: 18262012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Incisor compliance following operative procedures: a rapid 3-D finite element analysis using micro-CT data.
    Magne P; Tan DT
    J Adhes Dent; 2008 Feb; 10(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 18389736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Mechanical behavior of Class I cavities restored by different material combinations under loading and polymerization shrinkage stress. A 3D-FEA study.
    Ausiello PP; Ciaramella S; Lanzotti A; Ventre M; Borges AL; Tribst JP; Dal Piva A; Garcia-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2019 Apr; 32(2):55-60. PubMed ID: 31094138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with class II bonded composite resin.
    Eakle WS
    J Dent Res; 1986 Feb; 65(2):149-53. PubMed ID: 3511111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Debonding of adhesively restored deep Class II MOD restorations after functional loading.
    Ausiello P; Davidson CL; Cascone P; DeGee AJ; Rengo S
    Am J Dent; 1999 Apr; 12(2):84-8. PubMed ID: 10477988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Enhancing the mechanical stability of restored teeth with interfacial cracks: Finite element analysis.
    Babaei B; Prusty BG
    J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2023 Dec; 148():106191. PubMed ID: 37847958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Influence of dentin presealing on the fracture strength of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
    Shafiei F; Ghahramani Y
    Gen Dent; 2021; 69(3):37-41. PubMed ID: 33908876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored With Different Methods.
    Mergulhão VA; de Mendonça LS; de Albuquerque MS; Braz R
    Oper Dent; 2019; 44(1):E1-E11. PubMed ID: 30715998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Fatigue performance of endodontically treated molars restored with different dentin replacement materials.
    Molnár J; Fráter M; Sáry T; Braunitzer G; Vallittu PK; Lassila L; Garoushi S
    Dent Mater; 2022 Apr; 38(4):e83-e93. PubMed ID: 35227528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Biomechanical Properties of First Maxillary Molars with Different Endodontic Cavities: A Finite Element Analysis.
    Jiang Q; Huang Y; Tu X; Li Z; He Y; Yang X
    J Endod; 2018 Aug; 44(8):1283-1288. PubMed ID: 29910031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A comparison of the mechanical behavior of posterior teeth with amalgam and composite MOD restorations.
    Arola D; Galles LA; Sarubin MF
    J Dent; 2001 Jan; 29(1):63-73. PubMed ID: 11137640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Effect of preparation design on fracture strength of compromised molars restored with direct composite resin restorations: An in vitro and finite element analysis study.
    Hofsteenge JW; Carvalho MA; Botenga ELF; Cune MS; Özcan M; Magne P; Gresnigt MMM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jun; 131(6):1150-1158. PubMed ID: 38670907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Influence of cavity design preparation on stress values in maxillary premolar: a finite element analysis.
    Kantardzić I; Vasiljević D; Blazić L; Luzanin O
    Croat Med J; 2012 Dec; 53(6):568-76. PubMed ID: 23275322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Mechanical properties, shrinkage stress, cuspal strain and fracture resistance of molars restored with bulk-fill composites and incremental filling technique.
    Rosatto CM; Bicalho AA; Veríssimo C; Bragança GF; Rodrigues MP; Tantbirojn D; Versluis A; Soares CJ
    J Dent; 2015 Dec; 43(12):1519-28. PubMed ID: 26449641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Interfacial adaptation of a Class II polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite laminate restoration in vivo.
    Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2000 Apr; 58(2):77-84. PubMed ID: 10894429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Simulated fatigue resistance of composite resin versus porcelain CAD/CAM overlay restorations on endodontically treated molars.
    Magne P; Knezevic A
    Quintessence Int; 2009 Feb; 40(2):125-33. PubMed ID: 19169444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Stress Distribution, Tooth Remaining Strain, and Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Molars Restored Without or With One or Two Fiberglass Posts And Direct Composite Resin.
    Barcelos LM; Bicalho AA; Veríssimo C; Rodrigues MP; Soares CJ
    Oper Dent; 2017; 42(6):646-657. PubMed ID: 28976843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: an in vitro study.
    Desai PD; Das UK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):877. PubMed ID: 22484893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The effect of glass ionomer cement or composite resin bases on restoration of cuspal stiffness of endodontically treated premolars in vitro.
    Hofmann N; Just N; Haller B; Hugo B; Klaiber B
    Clin Oral Investig; 1998 Jun; 2(2):77-83. PubMed ID: 15490780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Cuspal deflection, strain and microleakage of endodontically treated premolar teeth restored with direct resin composites.
    Taha NA; Palamara JE; Messer HH
    J Dent; 2009 Sep; 37(9):724-30. PubMed ID: 19581032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.