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 *

279 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 369407)

  • 1. Finishing of enamel surfaces after debonding of orthodontic attachments.
    Retief DH; Denys FR
    Angle Orthod; 1979 Jan; 49(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 369407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Optimization of a procedure for rebonding dislodged orthodontic brackets.
    Mui B; Rossouw PE; Kulkarni GV
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Jun; 69(3):276-81. PubMed ID: 10371435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Enamel surface morphology after bracket debonding.
    Osorio R; Toledano M; García-Godoy F
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1998; 65(5):313-7, 354. PubMed ID: 9795734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Enamel surface evaluation after bracket debonding and different resin removal methods.
    Vidor MM; Felix RP; Marchioro EM; Hahn L
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(2):61-7. PubMed ID: 25992989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Laboratory evaluation of a compomer and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement for orthodontic bonding.
    Millett DT; Cattanach D; McFadzean R; Pattison J; McColl J
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Feb; 69(1):58-63; discussion 64. PubMed ID: 10022186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Bracket bonding with 15- or 60-second etching and adhesive remaining on enamel after debonding.
    Osorio R; Toledano M; Garcia-Godoy F
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Feb; 69(1):45-8. PubMed ID: 10022184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of different debonding techniques on the enamel surface: an in vitro qualitative study.
    Zarrinnia K; Eid NM; Kehoe MJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1995 Sep; 108(3):284-93. PubMed ID: 7661146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of bracket debonding force between two conventional resin adhesives and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: an in vitro and in vivo study.
    Shammaa I; Ngan P; Kim H; Kao E; Gladwin M; Gunel E; Brown C
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Oct; 69(5):463-9. PubMed ID: 10515145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. In-vivo evaluation of the surface roughness and morphology of enamel after bracket removal and polishing by different techniques.
    Faria-Júnior ÉM; Guiraldo RD; Berger SB; Correr AB; Correr-Sobrinho L; Contreras EF; Lopes MB
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Mar; 147(3):324-9. PubMed ID: 25726399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Shear strength of ceramic brackets bonded to etched or unetched enamel.
    Garcia-Godoy F; Martin S
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1995; 19(3):181-3. PubMed ID: 8611486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An electron microscopic evaluation of the enamel surface subsequent to various debonding procedures.
    Howell S; Weekes WT
    Aust Dent J; 1990 Jun; 35(3):245-52. PubMed ID: 2203330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative SEM studies of the enamel surface appearance following the use of glass ionomer cement and a diacrylate resin for bracket bonding.
    Ostman-Andersson E; Marcusson A; Hörstedt P
    Swed Dent J; 1993; 17(4):139-46. PubMed ID: 8236031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Enamel loss at bond-up, debond and clean-up following the use of a conventional light-cured composite and a resin-modified glass polyalkenoate cement.
    Ireland AJ; Hosein I; Sherriff M
    Eur J Orthod; 2005 Aug; 27(4):413-9. PubMed ID: 16043478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An in vitro investigation of the effectiveness of bioactive glass air-abrasion in the 'selective' removal of orthodontic resin adhesive.
    Banerjee A; Paolinelis G; Socker M; McDonald F; Watson TF
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2008 Oct; 116(5):488-92. PubMed ID: 18821993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Removal of Invisalign retention attachments: a new minimally invasive method.
    Ruiz JL; Finger WJ; Sasazaki H; Komatsu M
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2009; 30(9):634-6, 638, 640 passim. PubMed ID: 19998730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of pretreatment with fluoride on the tensile strength of orthodontic bonding.
    Wang WN; Sheen DH
    Angle Orthod; 1991; 61(1):31-4. PubMed ID: 1826416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of debonding of orthodontic brackets on topography and surface roughness of composite restorations.
    Moradi M; Hormozi E; Shamohammadi M; Rakhshan V
    Int Orthod; 2018 Dec; 16(4):623-637. PubMed ID: 30343063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Office reconditioning of stainless steel orthodontic attachments.
    Quick AN; Harris AM; Joseph VP
    Eur J Orthod; 2005 Jun; 27(3):231-6. PubMed ID: 15947221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of fluoride-releasing light-cured resin on shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets.
    Tuncer C; Tuncer BB; Ulusoy C
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jan; 135(1):14.e1-6; discussion 14-5. PubMed ID: 19121495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Debonding characteristics of a polymer mesh base ceramic bracket bonded with two different conditioning methods.
    Elekdag-Turk S; Isci D; Ozkalayci N; Turk T
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Feb; 31(1):84-9. PubMed ID: 19164413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.