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 *

506 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35221127)

  • 1. Clinical efficacy of resin-based direct posterior restorations and glass-ionomer restorations - An updated meta-analysis of clinical outcome parameters.
    Heintze SD; Loguercio AD; Hanzen TA; Reis A; Rousson V
    Dent Mater; 2022 May; 38(5):e109-e135. PubMed ID: 35221127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical effectiveness of direct class II restorations - a meta-analysis.
    Heintze SD; Rousson V
    J Adhes Dent; 2012 Aug; 14(5):407-31. PubMed ID: 23082310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating effectiveness of a bulk-fill composite resin, a conventional composite resin and a reinforced glass ionomer in Class II cavities: one-year results.
    Balkaya H; Arslan S; Pala K
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2019; 27():e20180678. PubMed ID: 31596369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Meta-Analysis of the Influence of Bonding Parameters on the Clinical Outcome of Tooth-colored Cervical Restorations.
    Mahn E; Rousson V; Heintze S
    J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug; 17(5):391-403. PubMed ID: 26525003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Clinical effectiveness of direct anterior restorations--a meta-analysis.
    Heintze SD; Rousson V; Hickel R
    Dent Mater; 2015 May; 31(5):481-95. PubMed ID: 25773188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement or composite resin for restorations in posterior permanent teeth? A systematic review and meta-analyses.
    Cribari L; Madeira L; Roeder RBR; Macedo RM; Wambier LM; Porto TS; Gonzaga CC; Kaizer MR
    J Dent; 2023 Oct; 137():104629. PubMed ID: 37499738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. WITHDRAWN: Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition.
    Yengopal V; Harnekar SY; Patel N; Siegfried N
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2016 Oct; 10(10):CD004483. PubMed ID: 27748505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries.
    Dorri M; Martinez-Zapata MJ; Walsh T; Marinho VC; Sheiham Deceased A; Zaror C
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Dec; 12(12):CD008072. PubMed ID: 29284075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement and composite resin in Class II restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Dias AGA; Magno MB; Delbem ACB; Cunha RF; Maia LC; Pessan JP
    J Dent; 2018 Jun; 73():1-13. PubMed ID: 29649506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical comparison of different glass ionomer-based restoratives and a bulk-fill resin composite in Class I cavities: A 48-month randomized split-mouth controlled trial.
    Bayazıt EÖ; Başeren M; Meral E
    J Dent; 2023 Apr; 131():104473. PubMed ID: 36863696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition.
    Yengopal V; Harneker SY; Patel N; Siegfried N
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2009 Apr; (2):CD004483. PubMed ID: 19370602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations.
    van Dijken JW
    Am J Dent; 1996 Oct; 9(5):195-8. PubMed ID: 9545903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations.
    Toledano M; Osorio E; Osorio R; García-Godoy F
    J Prosthet Dent; 1999 May; 81(5):610-5. PubMed ID: 10220667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Impact of head and neck radiotherapy on the longevity of dental adhesive restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Palmier NR; Madrid Troconis CC; Normando AGC; Guerra ENS; Araújo ALD; Arboleda LPA; Fonsêca JM; de Pauli Paglioni M; Gomes-Silva W; Vechiato Filho AJ; González-Arriagada WA; Paes Leme AF; Prado-Ribeiro AC; Brandão TB; de Goes MF; Lopes MA; Santos-Silva AR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Nov; 128(5):886-896. PubMed ID: 33715834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Five-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of high-viscosity glass ionomer restorative systems in small class II restorations.
    Wafaie RA; Ibrahim Ali A; El-Negoly SAE; Mahmoud SH
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2023 Apr; 35(3):538-555. PubMed ID: 36564970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical performance of high-viscosity glass ionomer and resin composite on minimally invasive occlusal restorations performed without rubber-dam isolation: a two-year randomised split-mouth study.
    Hatirli H; Yasa B; Çelik EU
    Clin Oral Investig; 2021 Sep; 25(9):5493-5503. PubMed ID: 33683465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.
    Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; Chimello DT; Palma-Dibb RG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 31(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 15025658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Marginal adaptation and retention of a glass-ionomer, resin-modified glass-ionomers and a polyacid-modified resin composite in cervical Class-V lesions.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    Dent Mater; 1998 Jul; 14(4):294-306. PubMed ID: 10379259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical performance of aesthetic restorative materials in primary teeth according to the FDI criteria.
    Bektas Donmez S; Uysal S; Dolgun A; Turgut MD
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2016 Sep; 17(3):202-212. PubMed ID: 27759409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Longevity of posterior composite and compomer restorations in children placed under different types of anesthesia: a retrospective 5-year study.
    Pummer A; Cieplik F; Nikolić M; Buchalla W; Hiller KA; Schmalz G
    Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Jan; 24(1):141-150. PubMed ID: 31053896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 26.