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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7728815)

  • 1. The clinical performance of a new adhesive resin system in class V and IV restorations.
    Duke ES; Robbins JW; Trevino D
    Compendium; 1994 Jul; 15(7):852, 854, 856 passim; quiz 864. PubMed ID: 7728815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions.
    van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
    Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):915-22. PubMed ID: 18155288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
    Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cavity preparation devices: effect on microleakage of Class V resin-based composite restorations.
    Setien VJ; Cobb DS; Denehy GE; Vargas MA
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):157-62. PubMed ID: 11572294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A randomized controlled study evaluating the effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective phosphoric-acid etching of enamel.
    Van Meerbeek B; Kanumilli P; De Munck J; Van Landuyt K; Lambrechts P; Peumans M
    Dent Mater; 2005 Apr; 21(4):375-83. PubMed ID: 15766585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Microleakage study of different adhesive systems in Class V cavities prepared by Er,Cr:YSGG laser and bur preparation.
    Ergucu Z; Celik EU; Turkun M
    Gen Dent; 2007; 55(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 17333962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 6-year results.
    Busato AL; Loguercio AD; Reis A; Carrilho MR
    Am J Dent; 2001 Oct; 14(5):304-8. PubMed ID: 11803995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Microleakage of Class II box-type composite restorations.
    Opdam NJ; Roeters JJ; Burgersdijk RC
    Am J Dent; 1998 Aug; 11(4):160-4. PubMed ID: 10388369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Self-etching adhesives and postoperative sensitivity.
    Unemori M; Matsuya Y; Akashi A; Goto Y; Akamine A
    Am J Dent; 2004 Jun; 17(3):191-5. PubMed ID: 15301216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. SEM study of a self-etching primer adhesive system used for dentin bonding in primary and permanent teeth.
    da Silva Telles PD; Aparecida M; Machado M; Nör JE
    Pediatr Dent; 2001; 23(4):315-20. PubMed ID: 11572489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors associated with clinical success of cervical abrasion/erosion restorations.
    Powell LV; Johnson GH; Gordon GE
    Oper Dent; 1995; 20(1):7-13. PubMed ID: 8700767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations.
    Brackett WW; Dib A; Brackett MG; Reyes AA; Estrada BE
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):477-81. PubMed ID: 14531590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Marginal leakage of combinations of glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations.
    Sarne S; Mante MO; Mante FK
    J Clin Dent; 1996; 7(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 9238879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of additional enamel etching and a flowable composite to the interfacial integrity of Class II adhesive composite restorations.
    Belli S; Inokoshi S; Ozer F; Pereira PN; Ogata M; Tagami J
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):70-5. PubMed ID: 11203780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The micromorphologic relationship between resin and dentin in Class V restorations: an in vivo and in vitro investigation.
    Ferrari M
    Quintessence Int; 1994 Sep; 25(9):621-5. PubMed ID: 7568715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of incorrect application of a water-based adhesive system on the marginal adaptation of Class V restorations.
    Peschke A; Blunck U; Roulet JF
    Am J Dent; 2000 Oct; 13(5):239-44. PubMed ID: 11764109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Self-etching primer vs phosphoric acid: an alternative concept for composite-to-enamel bonding.
    Hannig M; Reinhardt KJ; Bott B
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):172-80. PubMed ID: 10530279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical evaluation of a filled adhesive system in Class 5 restorations.
    Boghosian A
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 1996 Aug; 17(8):750-2, 754-7. PubMed ID: 9051950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of acidic primers in microleakage of Class 5 composite resin restorations.
    Gordan VV; Vargas MA; Cobb DS; Denehy GE
    Oper Dent; 1998; 23(5):244-9. PubMed ID: 9863445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.