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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8484999)

  • 1. Rubber dam usage related to restoration quality and survival.
    Smales RJ
    Br Dent J; 1993 May; 174(9):330-3. PubMed ID: 8484999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of rubber dam isolation on restoration deterioration.
    Smales RJ
    Am J Dent; 1992 Oct; 5(5):277-9. PubMed ID: 1299257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Influence of the isolation method on the 10-year clinical behaviour of posterior resin composite restorations.
    Raskin A; Setcos JC; Vreven J; Wilson NH
    Clin Oral Investig; 2000 Sep; 4(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 11000319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Use of rubber dam versus cotton roll isolation on composite resin restorations' survival in primary molars: 2-year results from a non-inferiority clinical trial.
    Olegário IC; Moro BLP; Tedesco TK; Freitas RD; Pássaro AL; Garbim JR; Oliveira R; Mendes FM; ; Raggio DP
    BMC Oral Health; 2022 Oct; 22(1):440. PubMed ID: 36217147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Twelve-year survival of 2-surface composite resin and amalgam premolar restorations placed by dental students.
    Naghipur S; Pesun I; Nowakowski A; Kim A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):336-9. PubMed ID: 27086110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations.
    Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA
    Dent Mater; 2007 Jan; 23(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 16417916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Long-term deterioration of composite resin and amalgam restorations.
    Smales RJ
    Oper Dent; 1991; 16(6):202-9. PubMed ID: 1840079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Time required for placement of composite versus amalgam restorations.
    Dilley DC; Vann WF; Oldenburg TR; Crisp RM
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1990; 57(3):177-83. PubMed ID: 2345211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mercury levels in plasma and urine after removal of all amalgam restorations: the effect of using rubber dams.
    Berglund A; Molin M
    Dent Mater; 1997 Sep; 13(5):297-304. PubMed ID: 9823089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
    Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
    J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Attitudes and use of rubber dam by Irish general dental practitioners.
    Lynch CD; McConnell RJ
    Int Endod J; 2007 Jun; 40(6):427-32. PubMed ID: 17501755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Should a rubber dam be used with composite restorations?].
    Roeters FJ
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1999 Aug; 106(8):311. PubMed ID: 12138863
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Composite resin support of undermined enamel in amalgam restorations.
    Eidelman E
    Pediatr Dent; 1999; 21(2):118-20. PubMed ID: 10197337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of enamel-bonding, type of restoration, patient age and operator on the longevity of an anterior composite resin.
    Smales RJ
    Am J Dent; 1991 Jun; 4(3):130-3. PubMed ID: 1830747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of Isolation Method of the Operative Field on Gingival Damage, Patients' Preference, and Restoration Retention in Noncarious Cervical Lesions.
    Loguercio AD; Luque-Martinez I; Lisboa AH; Higashi C; Queiroz VA; Rego RO; Reis A
    Oper Dent; 2015; 40(6):581-93. PubMed ID: 26158415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations.
    Donly KJ; Segura A; Kanellis M; Erickson RL
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1999 Oct; 130(10):1459-66. PubMed ID: 10570589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 'Rubber dam usage related to restoration quality and survival'.
    Mair LH
    Br Dent J; 1993 Jun; 174(11):397. PubMed ID: 8347223
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of rubber-dam on the reconstruction of proximal contacts with adhesive tooth-colored restorations.
    Dörfer CE; Schriever A; Heidemann D; Staehle HJ; Pioch T
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(2):169-75. PubMed ID: 11570685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Attitudes of final year dental students to the use of rubber dam.
    Mala S; Lynch CD; Burke FM; Dummer PM
    Int Endod J; 2009 Jul; 42(7):632-8. PubMed ID: 19467044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Restoration deterioration related to later failure.
    Smales RJ; Webster DA
    Oper Dent; 1993; 18(4):130-7. PubMed ID: 8152980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.