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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8085126)

  • 1. A one-year clinical study of indirect and direct composite and ceramic inlays.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    Scand J Dent Res; 1994 Jun; 102(3):186-92. PubMed ID: 8085126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A 5-year clinical study of indirect and direct resin composite and ceramic inlays.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    Quintessence Int; 2001 Mar; 32(3):199-205. PubMed ID: 12066659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A prospective clinical study of indirect and direct composite and ceramic inlays: ten-year results.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    Quintessence Int; 2006 Feb; 37(2):139-44. PubMed ID: 16475376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A randomized 5-year clinical evaluation of 3 ceramic inlay systems.
    Molin MK; Karlsson SL
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):194-200. PubMed ID: 11203631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ceramic inlays (Cerec) cemented with either a dual-cured or a chemically cured composite resin luting agent. A 2-year clinical study.
    Sjögren G; Molin M; van Dijken J; Bergman M
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1995 Oct; 53(5):325-30. PubMed ID: 8553810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical and semiquantitative marginal analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Inokoshi S; Willems G; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    J Dent; 1995 Dec; 23(6):329-38. PubMed ID: 8530722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Three-year comparison of fired ceramic inlays cemented with composite resin or glass ionomer cement.
    Aberg CH; van Dijken JW; Olofsson AL
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1994 Jun; 52(3):140-9. PubMed ID: 8091960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. In-vivo evaluation of a feldspathic ceramic system: 2-year results.
    Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Hiller KA; Saller A
    J Dent; 1996; 24(1-2):25-31. PubMed ID: 8636488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.
    Mendonça JS; Neto RG; Santiago SL; Lauris JR; Navarro MF; de Carvalho RM
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Three-year evaluation of computer-machined ceramic inlays: influence of luting agent.
    Zuellig-Singer R; Bryant RW
    Quintessence Int; 1998 Sep; 29(9):573-82. PubMed ID: 9807141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Microleakage of direct and indirect inlay/onlay systems.
    Hasanreĭsoğlu U; Sönmez H; Uçtaşli S; Wilson HJ
    J Oral Rehabil; 1996 Jan; 23(1):66-71. PubMed ID: 8850164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A 3-year study of inlays milled from machinable ceramic blocks representing 2 different inlay systems.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Dec; 30(12):829-36. PubMed ID: 10765860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of marginal fit and microleakage of ceramic and composite inlays: an in vitro study.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    J Dent; 1994 Jun; 22(3):147-53. PubMed ID: 8027457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
    Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A 10-year prospective evaluation of CAD/CAM-manufactured (Cerec) ceramic inlays cemented with a chemically cured or dual-cured resin composite.
    Sjögren G; Molin M; van Dijken JW
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(2):241-6. PubMed ID: 15119879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Luting composite thickness of two ceramic inlay systems.
    Sertgöz A; Gemalmaz D; Alkumru H; Yoruç B
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1995 Jun; 3(4):151-4. PubMed ID: 8601157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. One-year clinical evaluation of composite and ceramic inlays in posterior teeth.
    Scheibenbogen A; Manhart J; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Oct; 80(4):410-6. PubMed ID: 9791786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fracture resistance of resin-based composite and ceramic inlays luted to sound human teeth.
    da Silva SB; Hilgert LA; Busato AL
    Am J Dent; 2004 Dec; 17(6):404-6. PubMed ID: 15724750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Marginal adaptation of four tooth-coloured inlay systems in vivo.
    Van Meerbeek B; Inokoshi S; Willems G; Noack MJ; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Roulet JF; Vanherle G
    J Dent; 1992 Feb; 20(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 1548381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Marginal and internal fit of four different types of ceramic inlays after luting. An in vitro study.
    Sjögren G
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1995 Feb; 53(1):24-8. PubMed ID: 7740927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.