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 *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35724939)

  • 1. Comparative evaluation of a fissure sealant and a flowable composite: A 36-month split-mouth, randomized clinical study.
    Ozan G; Sancakli HS; Erdemir U; Yaman BC; Yildiz SO; Yildiz E
    J Dent; 2022 Aug; 123():104205. PubMed ID: 35724939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical comparison of a flowable composite and fissure sealant: a 24-month split-mouth, randomized, and controlled study.
    Erdemir U; Sancakli HS; Yaman BC; Ozel S; Yucel T; Yıldız E
    J Dent; 2014 Feb; 42(2):149-57. PubMed ID: 24296163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Retention of pit and fissure sealant versus flowable composite: An
    Singh C; Kaur K; Kapoor K
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2019; 37(4):372-377. PubMed ID: 31710012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of Different Fissure Sealant Materials and Flowable Composites Used as Pit-and-fissure Sealants: A 24-Month Clinical Trial.
    Kucukyilmaz E; Savas S
    Pediatr Dent; 2015; 37(5):468-73. PubMed ID: 26531092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Application of fluoride releasing flowable resin in pit and fissure sealant of children with early enamel caries].
    Yan WJ; Zheng JJ; Chen XX
    Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2018 Oct; 50(5):911-914. PubMed ID: 30337757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of three fissure sealants: 24 month follow-up.
    Dukic W; Glavina D
    Eur Arch Paediatr Dent; 2007 Sep; 8(3):163-6. PubMed ID: 17908543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Clinical evaluation of three different materials for fissure sealing after 12 months].
    Dukić W; Glavina D
    Acta Med Croatica; 2006 Jun; 60(3):209-14. PubMed ID: 16933833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical evaluation of a medium-filled flowable restorative material as a pit and fissure sealant.
    Autio-Gold JT
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):325-9. PubMed ID: 12120768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 2-year clinical performance of a fluoride-containing fissure sealant in young schoolchildren at caries risk.
    Carlsson A; Petersson M; Twetman S
    Am J Dent; 1997 Jun; 10(3):115-9. PubMed ID: 9545884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite and flowable compomer for preventive resin restorations.
    Qin M; Liu H
    Oper Dent; 2005; 30(5):580-7. PubMed ID: 16268391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in permanent teeth.
    Ahovuo-Saloranta A; Forss H; Walsh T; Nordblad A; Mäkelä M; Worthington HV
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Jul; 7(7):CD001830. PubMed ID: 28759120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Retention Ability of a Glass Carbomer Pit and Fissure Sealant.
    Beresescu L; Kovacs M; Vlasa A; Stoica AM; Benedek C; Pop M; Bungardean D; Eșian D
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Feb; 19(4):. PubMed ID: 35206153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A comparative study of two fissure sealants: a 2-year clinical follow-up.
    Yildiz E; Dörter C; Efes B; Koray F
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Oct; 31(10):979-84. PubMed ID: 15387838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Caries-preventive efficacy and retention of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant: a 3-year split-mouth randomised clinical trial.
    Baseggio W; Naufel FS; Davidoff DC; Nahsan FP; Flury S; Rodrigues JA
    Oral Health Prev Dent; 2010; 8(3):261-8. PubMed ID: 20848004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Randomized, controlled trial comparing the retention of a flowable restorative system with a conventional resin sealant: one-year follow up.
    Corona SA; Borsatto MC; Garcia L; Ramos RP; Palma-Dibb RG
    Int J Paediatr Dent; 2005 Jan; 15(1):44-50. PubMed ID: 15663444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical and antibacterial effectiveness of three different sealant materials.
    Amin HE
    J Dent Hyg; 2008; 82(5):45. PubMed ID: 19055885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinical comparison of flowable composite to other fissure sealing materials--a 12 months study.
    Dukić W; Dukić OL; Milardović S; Vindakijević Z
    Coll Antropol; 2007 Dec; 31(4):1019-24. PubMed ID: 18217452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Retention and remineralization effect of moisture tolerant resin-based sealant and glass ionomer sealant on non-cavitated pit and fissure caries: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Alsabek L; Al-Nerabieah Z; Bshara N; Comisi JC
    J Dent; 2019 Jul; 86():69-74. PubMed ID: 31136817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The success rates of a glass ionomer cement and a resin-based fissure sealant placed by fifth-year undergraduate dental students.
    Ulusu T; Odabaş ME; Tüzüner T; Baygin O; Sillelioğlu H; Deveci C; Gökdoğan FG; Altuntaş A
    Eur Arch Paediatr Dent; 2012 Apr; 13(2):94-7. PubMed ID: 22449810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Clinical Evaluation of the Retention of Self-adhering Flowable Composite as Fissure Sealant in 6-9-year-old Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Bhuvaneswari P; Vinay C; Uloopi KS; RojaRamya KS; Chandrasekhar R; Chaitanya P
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2022; 15(3):322-326. PubMed ID: 35991800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.