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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8195477)

  • 1. Replacement of missing cusps: an in vitro study.
    Macpherson LC; Smith BG
    J Dent; 1994 Apr; 22(2):118-20. PubMed ID: 8195477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of different transitional restorations on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
    Qualtrough AJ; Cawte SG; Wilson NH
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. In vitro fracture resistance of teeth with dentin-bonded ceramic crowns and core build-ups.
    Lang M; McHugh S; Burke FJ
    Am J Dent; 2003 Sep; 16 Spec No():88A-96A. PubMed ID: 14674507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reinforcement of weakened cusps by adhesive restorative materials: an in-vitro study.
    Macpherson LC; Smith BG
    Br Dent J; 1995 May; 178(9):341-4. PubMed ID: 7766457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
    Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The performance of bonded vs. pin-retained complex amalgam restorations: a five-year clinical evaluation.
    Summitt JB; Burgess JO; Berry TG; Robbins JW; Osborne JW; Haveman CW
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 Jul; 132(7):923-31. PubMed ID: 11480646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bonded amalgam restorations: a comparative study of glass-ionomer and resin adhesives.
    al-Moayad M; Aboush YE; Elderton RJ
    Br Dent J; 1993 Nov; 175(10):363-7. PubMed ID: 8257646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cuspal reinforcement in endodontically treated molars.
    Uyehara MY; Davis RD; Overton JD
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(6):364-70. PubMed ID: 10823086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fracture resistance of teeth with Class 2 silver amalgam, posterior composite, and glass cermet restorations.
    Jagadish S; Yogesh BG
    Oper Dent; 1990; 15(2):42-7. PubMed ID: 2374743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Support of undermined occlusal enamel provided by restorative materials.
    Latino C; Troendle K; Summitt JB
    Quintessence Int; 2001 Apr; 32(4):287-91. PubMed ID: 12066648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fracture durability of restored functional cusps on maxillary nonvital premolar teeth.
    Ulusoy N; Nayyar A; Morris CF; Fairhurst CW
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Sep; 66(3):330-5. PubMed ID: 1800729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bond strength comparison of amalgam repair protocols using resin composite in situations with and without dentin exposure.
    Ozcan M; Schoonbeek G; Gökçe B; Cömlekoglu E; Dündar M
    Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):655-62. PubMed ID: 21180005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Fracture resistance of four different restorations for cuspal replacement.
    Segura A; Riggins R
    J Oral Rehabil; 1999 Dec; 26(12):928-31. PubMed ID: 10620155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fracture strength and fracture patterns of root filled teeth restored with direct resin restorations.
    Taha NA; Palamara JE; Messer HH
    J Dent; 2011 Aug; 39(8):527-35. PubMed ID: 21620926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement.
    Xie H; Zhang F; Wu Y; Chen C; Liu W
    Aust Dent J; 2008 Dec; 53(4):325-31. PubMed ID: 19133948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A technical report on repair of amalgam-dentin complex.
    Ozcan M; Salihoğlu-Yener E
    Oper Dent; 2011; 36(5):563-6. PubMed ID: 21834704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with glass ionomer-composite resin systems.
    Joynt RB; Davis EL; Wieczkowski G; Williams DA
    J Prosthet Dent; 1989 Jul; 62(1):28-31. PubMed ID: 2746538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Secondary caries formation in vitro around glass ionomer-lined amalgam and composite restorations.
    Dionysopoulos P; Kotsanos N; Papadogianis Y
    J Oral Rehabil; 1996 Aug; 23(8):511-9. PubMed ID: 8866262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fracture resistance of pin-retained amalgam, composite resin, and alloy-reinforced glass ionomer core materials.
    Kao EC
    J Prosthet Dent; 1991 Oct; 66(4):463-71. PubMed ID: 1838771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Influence of bonded amalgam restorations on the fracture strength of teeth.
    Oliveira JP; Cochran MA; Moore BK
    Oper Dent; 1996; 21(3):110-5. PubMed ID: 9002870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.