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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 5262805)

  • 21. Comparative quantitative and qualitative assessment of the marginal adaptation and apposition of bonded amalgam restorations using luting glass ionomer and 4-META adhesive liner under a scanning electron microscope. An in vitro study.
    Abraham MM; Sudeep PT; Bhat KS
    Indian J Dent Res; 1999; 10(2):43-53. PubMed ID: 10865391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies.
    Aggarwal V; Singla M; Yadav S; Yadav H
    J Dent; 2014 May; 42(5):619-25. PubMed ID: 24631232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials.
    Lai GY; Zhu LK; Li MY; Wang J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):363-8. PubMed ID: 23998624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Marginal defects in amalgam fillings after the use of 2 intermediate substances].
    Zimmer J
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 1993; 103(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 8430283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 1.
    Hilton TJ
    Am J Dent; 2002 Jun; 15(3):198-210. PubMed ID: 12469759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Clinical use of a composite restorative.
    Scott WR; Roydhouse RH
    J Can Dent Assoc (Tor); 1968 Sep; 34(9):469-75. PubMed ID: 5248866
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Restorative materials and cavity preparation design.
    Gilmore HW
    Dent Clin North Am; 1971 Jan; 15(1):99-114. PubMed ID: 4923237
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?].
    De Moor R; Delmé K
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. An assessment of anterior restorations in vivo using the scanning electron microscope. Results after one year.
    Tay WM; Waite IM; Morrant GA; Borlace HR; Bultitude FW
    Br Dent J; 1974 Dec; 137(12):463-71. PubMed ID: 4531311
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The surface finish of the new microfill restorative materials. A scanning electron microscope study.
    Lui JL; Low T
    J Oral Rehabil; 1982 Jan; 9(1):67-82. PubMed ID: 6950073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparative physico-mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    J Dent Res; 1997 Apr; 76(4):883-94. PubMed ID: 9126185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A microscopic investigation of the adaptation of some plastic filling materials to dental cavity walls.
    Asmussen E; Jorgensen KD
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1972 Mar; 30(1):3-21. PubMed ID: 4504437
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Fluoride-releasing dental restorative materials.
    Eichmiller FC; Marjenhoff WA
    Oper Dent; 1998; 23(5):218-28. PubMed ID: 9863442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Adaptation of some dental restoratives to cavity walls as observed with the scanning electron microscope.
    Meurman JH; Asikainen M; Nevaste M
    Proc Finn Dent Soc; 1975 Apr; 71(2):36-44. PubMed ID: 1144380
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Restorative dental materials: scanning electron microscopy and x-ray microanalysis.
    Marshall GW; Marshall SJ; Bayne SC
    Scanning Microsc; 1988 Dec; 2(4):2007-28. PubMed ID: 3070734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results.
    Neme AL; Evans DB; Maxson BB
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Scanning electron microscopy study of a composite dental restorative material after surface etching.
    Mueller HJ; Bapna MS; Wayman RD
    J Dent Res; 1971; 50(2):512. PubMed ID: 5290899
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Study of microleakage at Class I cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser using three types of restorative materials.
    Khan MF; Yonaga K; Kimura Y; Funato A; Matsumoto K
    J Clin Laser Med Surg; 1998 Dec; 16(6):305-8. PubMed ID: 10204435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Dental plaque on filling materials in in vitro investigations].
    Suliborski S; Krzemiński Z
    Czas Stomatol; 1981 May; 34(5):539-45. PubMed ID: 6949698
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Surface smoothness of three esthetic restorative materials: a SEM study.
    Minervini R
    Gen Dent; 1983; 31(6):466-8. PubMed ID: 6233203
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.