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 *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8035157)

  • 1. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of different endodontic procedures on dentin morphology of human teeth.
    Prati C; Selighini M; Ferrieri P; Mongiorgi R
    J Endod; 1994 Apr; 20(4):174-9. PubMed ID: 8035157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of precurving endosonic files on the amount of debris and smear layer remaining in curved root canals.
    Lumley PJ; Walmsley AD; Walton RE; Rippin JW
    J Endod; 1992 Dec; 18(12):616-9. PubMed ID: 1298802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Ultrastructural morphologic evaluation of root canal walls prepared by two rotary nickel-titanium systems: a comparative study.
    Sabet NE; Lutfy RA
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Sep; 106(3):e59-66. PubMed ID: 18602300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Scanning electron microscope observation of canal cleanliness.
    Mandel E; Machtou P; Friedman S
    J Endod; 1990 Jun; 16(6):279-83. PubMed ID: 2074426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation.
    Hülsmann M; Rümmelin C; Schäfers F
    J Endod; 1997 May; 23(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 9545932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of high-frequency electrical pulses on organic tissue in root canals.
    Lendini M; Alemanno E; Migliaretti G; Berutti E
    Int Endod J; 2005 Aug; 38(8):531-8. PubMed ID: 16011771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparative scanning electron microscopic investigation of the efficacy of manual and automated instrumentation of root canals.
    Schäfer E; Zapke K
    J Endod; 2000 Nov; 26(11):660-4. PubMed ID: 11469296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effectiveness in cleaning oval-shaped root canals using Anatomic Endodontic Technology, ProFile and manual instrumentation: a scanning electron microscopic study.
    Zmener O; Pameijer CH; Banegas G
    Int Endod J; 2005 Jun; 38(6):356-63. PubMed ID: 15910470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of the smear layer removal effectiveness of EDTA using two techniques: an SEM study.
    Tinaz AC; Karadag LS; Alaçam T; Mihçioglu T
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Feb; 7(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 16491143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cleaning of oval canals using ultrasonic or sonic instrumentation.
    Lumley PJ; Walmsley AD; Walton RE; Rippin JW
    J Endod; 1993 Sep; 19(9):453-7. PubMed ID: 8263452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of the effectiveness of the F-file versus ultrasonic activation of a K-file to remove smear layer.
    Chopra S; Murray PE; Namerow KN
    J Endod; 2008 Oct; 34(10):1243-5. PubMed ID: 18793930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) study of the smear layer in root canals.
    Tanboğa I; Kuraner T
    J Marmara Univ Dent Fac; 1990 Sep; 1(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 2129919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. SEM evaluation of canal wall dentine following use of Mtwo and ProTaper NiTi rotary instruments.
    Foschi F; Nucci C; Montebugnoli L; Marchionni S; Breschi L; Malagnino VA; Prati C
    Int Endod J; 2004 Dec; 37(12):832-9. PubMed ID: 15548274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of application time of EDTA and NaOCl on intracanal smear layer removal: an SEM analysis.
    Teixeira CS; Felippe MC; Felippe WT
    Int Endod J; 2005 May; 38(5):285-90. PubMed ID: 15876291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Efficacy of Er:YAG laser irradiation in removing debris and smear layer on root canal walls.
    Takeda FH; Harashima T; Kimura Y; Matsumoto K
    J Endod; 1998 Aug; 24(8):548-51. PubMed ID: 9759018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Relationship between endodontic preparations and human dentin permeability measured in situ.
    Guignes P; Faure J; Maurette A
    J Endod; 1996 Feb; 22(2):60-7. PubMed ID: 8935019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of smear layer: a comparison of automated image analysis versus expert observers.
    George R; Rutley EB; Walsh LJ
    J Endod; 2008 Aug; 34(8):999-1002. PubMed ID: 18634934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Smear layer removal with passive ultrasonic irrigation and the NaviTip FX: a scanning electron microscopic study.
    Goel S; Tewari S
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Sep; 108(3):465-70. PubMed ID: 19576804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Smear layer production of K3 and ProFile Ni-Ti rotary instruments in curved root canals: a comparative SEM study.
    Kum KY; Kazemi RB; Cha BY; Zhu Q
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2006 Apr; 101(4):536-41. PubMed ID: 16545720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The efficacy of step-down procedures during endosonic instrumentation.
    Murgel C; Walmsley AD; Walton RE
    J Endod; 1991 Mar; 17(3):111-5. PubMed ID: 1940723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.