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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8599586)

  • 41. Early fracture resistance of amalgapin-retained complex amalgam restorations.
    Schulte GA; Hermesch CB; Vandewalle KS; Buikema DJ
    Oper Dent; 1998; 23(3):108-12. PubMed ID: 9656920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Alloy particle shape and sensitivity of high-copper amalgams to manipulative variables.
    Brown IH; Miller DR
    Am J Dent; 1993 Oct; 6(5):248-54. PubMed ID: 7880469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. [A finely dispersed copper alloy for amalgams--a prospective filling material in pediatric dentistry. II. Clinical research].
    Pobochina VV; Chuev VP
    Stomatologiia (Mosk); 1994; 73(3):62-5. PubMed ID: 7846721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. [Criteria for choice of an alloy for dental amalgams].
    De Valkeneer I; Bercy P
    Actual Odontostomatol (Paris); 1990 Jun; 44(170):219-36. PubMed ID: 2088017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Silver amalgam versus resin modified GIC class-II restorations in primary molars: twelve month clinical evaluation.
    Dutta BN; Gauba K; Tewari A; Chawla HS
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2001 Sep; 19(3):118-22. PubMed ID: 11817797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Relationship of restoration width, tooth position, and alloy to fracture at the margins of 13- to 14-year-old amalgams.
    Osborne JW; Gale EN
    J Dent Res; 1990 Sep; 69(9):1599-601. PubMed ID: 2398187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. A comparison of methods for evaluating the marginal fracture of amalgam restorations.
    Bryant RW; Mahler DB; Engle JH
    Dent Mater; 1985 Dec; 1(6):235-7. PubMed ID: 3868633
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Effect of Pd on the clinical performance of amalgam.
    Mahler DB; Engle JH; Adey JD
    J Dent Res; 1990 Nov; 69(11):1759-61. PubMed ID: 2229614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Direct-placement gallium restorative alloy: a 3-year clinical evaluation.
    Osborne JW; Summitt JB
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Jan; 30(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 10323158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Effect of restoration size on fracture resistance of bonded amalgam restorations.
    Lindemuth JS; Hagge MS; Broome JS
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(3):177-81. PubMed ID: 11203813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations: effect of thermal cycling.
    Helvatjoglou-Antoniades M; Theodoridou-Pahini S; Papadogiannis Y; Karezis A
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):316-23. PubMed ID: 11203837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Fit of cast commercially pure titanium and Ti-6Al-4V alloy crowns before and after marginal refinement by electrical discharge machining.
    Contreras EF; Henriques GE; Giolo SR; Nobilo MA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Nov; 88(5):467-72. PubMed ID: 12473994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Long-term influences on marginal fracture of amalgam restorations.
    Letzel H; Vrijhoef MM
    J Oral Rehabil; 1984 Mar; 11(2):95-101. PubMed ID: 6585529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Anaerobic microflora under Class I and Class II composite and amalgam restorations.
    Splieth C; Bernhardt O; Heinrich A; Bernhardt H; Meyer G
    Quintessence Int; 2003; 34(7):497-503. PubMed ID: 12946067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth.
    Manhart J; Neuerer P; Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A; Hickel R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Sep; 84(3):289-96. PubMed ID: 11005901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class III cavities: three-year results.
    Demirci M; Ersev H; Uçok M
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(3):223-30. PubMed ID: 12022451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. [Class II cavity for amalgam. Proposed new modifications related to material characteristics].
    Riccio C; Piccirillo P; Belnome G; Serpico R
    Arch Stomatol (Napoli); 1990; 31(4):683-91. PubMed ID: 2100480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Evaluation of high-temperature distortion of high-palladium metal-ceramic crowns.
    Papazoglou E; Brantley WA; Johnston WM
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Feb; 85(2):133-40. PubMed ID: 11208202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a gallium restorative alloy.
    Kiremitci A; Bolay S
    J Oral Rehabil; 2003 Jun; 30(6):664-7. PubMed ID: 12787466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Creep versus marginal fracture of amalgam restorations.
    Vrijhoef MM; Letzel H
    J Oral Rehabil; 1986 Jul; 13(4):299-303. PubMed ID: 3463718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.