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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36863696)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Could bulk fill glass hybrid restorative materials replace composite resins in treating permanent teeth? A randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Uyumaz FÜ; Abaklı İnci M; Özer H
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 May; 36(5):702-709. PubMed ID: 38108583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A randomized controlled 10 years follow up of a glass ionomer restorative material in class I and class II cavities.
    Gurgan S; Kutuk ZB; Yalcin Cakir F; Ergin E
    J Dent; 2020 Mar; 94():103175. PubMed ID: 31351909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 10 year comparison of glass ionomer and composite resin restoration materials in class 1 and 2 cavities.
    Hutchison C; Cave V
    Evid Based Dent; 2019 Dec; 20(4):113-114. PubMed ID: 31863046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. A Two-year Clinical Comparison of Three Different Restorative Materials in Class II Cavities.
    Balkaya H; Arslan S
    Oper Dent; 2020; 45(1):E32-E42. PubMed ID: 31738696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Five-year double-blind randomized clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a polyacid-modified resin in noncarious cervical lesions.
    Loguercio AD; Reis A; Barbosa AN; Roulet JF
    J Adhes Dent; 2003; 5(4):323-32. PubMed ID: 15008339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Thirty-Six-Month Clinical Comparison of Bulk Fill and Nanofill Composite Restorations.
    Yazici AR; Antonson SA; Kutuk ZB; Ergin E
    Oper Dent; 2017; 42(5):478-485. PubMed ID: 28581919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. One-year evaluation of a new restorative glass ionomer cement for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in patients with systemic diseases: a randomized, clinical trial.
    Oz FD; Meral E; Ergİn E; Gurgan S
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2020; 28():e20200311. PubMed ID: 33111883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Clinical comparison of a micro-hybride resin-based composite and resin modified glass ionomer in the treatment of cervical caries lesions: 36-month, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial.
    Koc Vural U; Kerimova L; Kiremitci A
    Odontology; 2021 Apr; 109(2):376-384. PubMed ID: 32902766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Four-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system.
    Gurgan S; Kutuk ZB; Ergin E; Oztas SS; Cakir FY
    Oper Dent; 2015; 40(2):134-43. PubMed ID: 25299703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A randomized controlled clinical trial of glass carbomer restorations in Class II cavities in primary molars: 12-month results.
    El-Housseiny AA; Alamoudi NM; Nouri S; Felemban O
    Quintessence Int; 2019; 50(7):522-532. PubMed ID: 31134226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial of conventional and heavy flowable composites in class II restorations.
    Rocha Gomes Torres C; Rêgo HM; Perote LC; Santos LF; Kamozaki MB; Gutierrez NC; Di Nicoló R; Borges AB
    J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):793-9. PubMed ID: 24769385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Three-year evaluation of different adhesion strategies in non-carious cervical lesion restorations: a randomized clinical trial.
    Gonçalves DFM; Shinohara MS; Carvalho PRMA; Ramos FSES; Oliveira LC; Omoto ÉM; Fagundes TC
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2021; 29():e20210192. PubMed ID: 34705986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
    Pascon FM; Kantovitz KR; Caldo-Teixeira AS; Borges AF; Silva TN; Puppin-Rontani RM; Garcia-Godoy F
    J Dent; 2006 Jul; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparative evaluation of different adhesive strategies of a universal adhesive in class II bulk-fill restorations: A 48-month randomized controlled trial.
    Yazici AR; Uslu Tekce A; Kutuk ZB
    J Dent; 2022 Feb; 117():103921. PubMed ID: 34896442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.