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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37312832)

  • 1. Surface Micro-Hardness and Wear Resistance of a Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite in Comparison to Conventional Flowable Composites.
    Azizi F; Ezoji F; Khafri S; Esmaeili B
    Front Dent; 2023; 20():10. PubMed ID: 37312832
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology.
    Ilie N; Hickel R
    Dent Mater; 2011 Apr; 27(4):348-55. PubMed ID: 21194743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bonding performance of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel, dentin and a nano-hybrid composite.
    Peterson J; Rizk M; Hoch M; Wiegand A
    Odontology; 2018 Apr; 106(2):171-180. PubMed ID: 29243187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Lingual retainer materials: Comparative evaluation of wear resistance of flowable nanocomposites and universal composite: An
    Nosouhian M; Monirifard M; Gharibpour F; Sadeghian S
    Dent Res J (Isfahan); 2021; 18():69. PubMed ID: 34584647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mechanical properties and three-body wear of dental restoratives and their comparative flowable materials.
    Schultz S; Rosentritt M; Behr M; Handel G
    Quintessence Int; 2010 Jan; 41(1):e1-10. PubMed ID: 19907723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Surface microhardness of a self-adhesive composite in comparison with conventional composite resins.
    Hashemikamangar SS; Meymand MZ; Kharazifard MJ; Valizadeh S
    Dent Med Probl; 2020; 57(3):247-253. PubMed ID: 33001591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of flowable bulk-fill and flowable resin-based composites: an in vitro analysis.
    Engelhardt F; Hahnel S; Preis V; Rosentritt M
    Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Nov; 20(8):2123-2130. PubMed ID: 26745959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influences of Successive Exposure to Bleaching and Fluoride Preparations on the Surface Hardness and Roughness of the Aged Resin Composite Restoratives.
    Abdelaziz KM; Mir S; Khateeb SU; Baba SM; Alshahrani SS; Alshahrani EA; Alsafi ZA
    Medicina (Kaunas); 2020 Sep; 56(9):. PubMed ID: 32947937
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Surface morphology and mechanical properties of new-generation flowable resin composites for dental restoration.
    Salerno M; Derchi G; Thorat S; Ceseracciu L; Ruffilli R; Barone AC
    Dent Mater; 2011 Dec; 27(12):1221-8. PubMed ID: 22000067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Randomized prospective clinical trial of class II restorations using flowable bulk-fill resin composites: 4-year follow-up.
    Endo Hoshino IA; Fraga Briso AL; Bueno Esteves LM; Dos Santos PH; Meira Borghi Frascino S; Fagundes TC
    Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Sep; 26(9):5697-5710. PubMed ID: 35556174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Influence of flowable materials on microleakage of nanofilled and hybrid Class II composite restorations with LED and QTH LCUs.
    Sadeghi M
    Indian J Dent Res; 2009; 20(2):159-63. PubMed ID: 19553715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Wear of bulk-fill resin composites.
    Osiewicz MA; Werner A; Roeters FJM; Kleverlaan CJ
    Dent Mater; 2022 Mar; 38(3):549-553. PubMed ID: 34972580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Relative wear of flowable and highly filled composite.
    Clelland NL; Pagnotto MP; Kerby RE; Seghi RR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Feb; 93(2):153-7. PubMed ID: 15674226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Surface roughness and gloss of novel flowable composites after polishing and simulated brushing wear].
    Wang RL; Yuan CY; Pan YX; Tian FC; Wang ZH; Wang XY
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2017 Apr; 52(4):243-247. PubMed ID: 28412791
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Leakage pathway of Class V cavities restored with different flowable resin composite restorations.
    Awliya WY; El-Sahn AM
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 18335730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of the wear resistance and hardness of indirect composite resins.
    Mandikos MN; McGivney GP; Davis E; Bush PJ; Carter JM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Apr; 85(4):386-95. PubMed ID: 11319537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of Type of Resin Composite Material on Porosity, Interfacial Gaps and Microhardness of Small Class I Restorations.
    Alkhubaizi Q; Alomari Q; Sabti MY; Melo MA
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2023 Jan; 24(1):4-8. PubMed ID: 37189005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Wear and microhardness of different resin composite materials.
    Say EC; Civelek A; Nobecourt A; Ersoy M; Guleryuz C
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):628-34. PubMed ID: 14531611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Selected characteristics of an Ormocer and a conventional hybrid resin composite.
    Tagtekin DA; Yanikoglu FC; Bozkurt FO; Kologlu B; Sur H
    Dent Mater; 2004 Jun; 20(5):487-97. PubMed ID: 15081556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Polymerization Stress and Gap Formation of Self-adhesive, Bulk-fill and Flowable Composite Resins.
    Nakano EL; de Souza A; Boaro L; Catalani LH; Braga RR; Gonçalves F
    Oper Dent; 2020 Nov; 45(6):E308-E316. PubMed ID: 32516396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.