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 *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7034910)

  • 21. Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations.
    Hickel R; Manhart J; García-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):41D-54D. PubMed ID: 11763918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The influence of a packable resin composite, conventional resin composite and amalgam on molar cuspal stiffness.
    Molinaro JD; Diefenderfer KE; Strother JM
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(5):516-24. PubMed ID: 12216572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of composite and amalgam in posterior teeth of children.
    Oldenburg TR; Vann WF; Dilley DC
    Dent Mater; 1987 Aug; 3(4):182-6. PubMed ID: 3481593
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Clinical evaluation of the quality of amalgam, acrylic and cast restorations. Results of a pilot study].
    Pieper K; Motsch A; Sennhenn S; Färbom L
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1988 Aug; 43(8):874-9. PubMed ID: 3255586
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Teaching of posterior resin-based composite restorations in Brazilian dental schools.
    Gordan VV; Mjör IA; Veiga Filho LC; Ritter AV
    Quintessence Int; 2000; 31(10):735-40. PubMed ID: 11204001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Class II glass ionomer cermet tunnel, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations over 2 years.
    Wilkie R; Lidums A; Smales R
    Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):181-4. PubMed ID: 7803004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Esthetic veneering of amalgam restorations with composite resin--combining the best of both worlds?
    Plasmans PJ; Reukers EA
    Oper Dent; 1993; 18(2):66-71. PubMed ID: 8337184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Amalgam. IX. Substitute for amalgam: durability of composite restorations].
    Schuurs AH; van Amerongen JP
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1993 Oct; 100(10):437-41. PubMed ID: 11822139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations: effect of thermal cycling.
    Helvatjoglou-Antoniades M; Theodoridou-Pahini S; Papadogiannis Y; Karezis A
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):316-23. PubMed ID: 11203837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The clinical evaluation of amalgam alloys.
    Jacobsen PH
    Br Dent J; 1984 Dec; 157(12):436-9. PubMed ID: 6397217
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The longevity of resin-based composite restorations in posterior teeth.
    Hondrum SO
    Gen Dent; 2000; 48(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 11199613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Goodbye amalgam, hello alternatives?
    Williams P
    J Can Dent Assoc; 1996 Feb; 62(2):139-44. PubMed ID: 8820166
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparison of wear and clinical performance between amalgam, composite and open sandwich restorations: 2-year results.
    Sachdeo A; Gray GB; Sulieman MA; Jagger DC
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2004 Mar; 12(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 15058177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Materials for conservative posterior restorations.
    Donovan TE; Cho GC
    J Calif Dent Assoc; 1996 Sep; 24(9):32-8. PubMed ID: 9120610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of proximal contacts of posterior composite restorations with 4 placement techniques.
    El-Badrawy WA; Leung BW; El-Mowafy O; Rubo JH; Rubo MH
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2003 Mar; 69(3):162-7. PubMed ID: 12622881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The composite resin restoration: a literature review. Part II. Comparisons between composite and alloy restorations.
    Full CA; Hollander WR
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):52-6. PubMed ID: 8432948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study.
    Kavvadia K; Kakaboura A; Vanderas AP; Papagiannoulis L
    Pediatr Dent; 2004; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Composite or amalgam? Not a black or white decision].
    Roeters FJ; Opdam NJ; Burgersdijk RC
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1992 Oct; 99(10):371-4. PubMed ID: 11820006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [2-year clinical observations on composite resins for Class II restorations].
    Katsatos I; Poulia S; Kotses I
    Odontostomatol Proodos; 1976; 30(2):69-74. PubMed ID: 829799
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Six-year clinical evaluation of bonded and pin-retained complex amalgam restorations.
    Summitt JB; Burgess JO; Berry TG; Robbins JW; Osborne JW; Haveman CW
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(3):261-8. PubMed ID: 15195725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.