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 *

160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8667268)

  • 1. Surface roughness of dentin after tooth preparation with different rotary instrumentation.
    Ayad MF; Rosenstiel SF; Hassan MM
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Feb; 75(2):122-8. PubMed ID: 8667268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of dental rotary instruments on the roughness and wettability of human dentin surfaces.
    Ayad MF; Johnston WM; Rosenstiel SF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Aug; 102(2):81-8. PubMed ID: 19643221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Superficial roughness on composite surface, composite enamel and composite dentin junctions after different finishing and polishing procedures. Part I: roughness after treatments with tungsten carbide vs diamond burs.
    Ferraris F; Conti A
    Int J Esthet Dent; 2014; 9(1):70-89. PubMed ID: 24757700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Influence of tooth preparation burs on the roughness and bond strength of adhesives to human dentin surfaces.
    Ayad MF; Maghrabi AA; Saif RE; García-Godoy F
    Am J Dent; 2011 Jun; 24(3):176-82. PubMed ID: 21874939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of tooth preparation burs and luting cement types on the marginal fit of extracoronal restorations.
    Ayad MF
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Feb; 18(2):145-51. PubMed ID: 19054303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of tooth surface roughness and type of cement on retention of complete cast crowns.
    Ayad MF; Rosenstiel SF; Salama M
    J Prosthet Dent; 1997 Feb; 77(2):116-21. PubMed ID: 9051596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Superficial roughness on composite surface, composite-enamel and composite-dentin junctions after different finishing and polishing procedures. Part II: roughness with diamond finishing and differences between enamel composite vs body composite.
    Ferraris F; Conti A
    Int J Esthet Dent; 2014; 9(2):184-204. PubMed ID: 24765626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Surface roughness and wettability of enamel and dentine surfaces prepared with different dental burs.
    Al-Omari WM; Mitchell CA; Cunningham JL
    J Oral Rehabil; 2001 Jul; 28(7):645-50. PubMed ID: 11422697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Micrographic and profilometric evaluation of the finish produced by diamond and tungsten carbide finishing burs on enamel and dentin.
    Price RB; Sutow EJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 1988 Sep; 60(3):311-6. PubMed ID: 2845071
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of different grit sizes of diamond rotary instruments for tooth preparation on the retention and adaptation of complete coverage restorations.
    Li YQ; Wang H; Wang YJ; Chen JH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Feb; 107(2):86-93. PubMed ID: 22304742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of rotary instrumentation and different etchants on removal of smear layer on human dentin.
    Ayad MF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jan; 85(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 11174681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of cutting instruments on permeability and morphology of the dentin surface.
    Sekimoto T; Derkson GD; Richardson AS
    Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):130-6. PubMed ID: 10530274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Surface roughness and cutting efficiency of composite finishing instruments.
    Jung M
    Oper Dent; 1997; 22(3):98-104. PubMed ID: 9484147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Iatrogenic tooth abrasion comparisons among composite materials and finishing techniques.
    Mitchell CA; Pintado MR; Douglas WH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Sep; 88(3):320-8. PubMed ID: 12426504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Surface roughness of tooth shoulder preparations created by rotary instrumentation, hand planing, and ultrasonic oscillation.
    Laufer BZ; Pilo R; Cardash HS
    J Prosthet Dent; 1996 Jan; 75(1):4-8. PubMed ID: 8850446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Finishing tooth-colored restorations in vitro: an index of surface alteration and finish-line destruction.
    Schmidlin PR; Göhring TN
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(1):80-6. PubMed ID: 14753337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of bur type on microtensile bond strengths of self-etching systems to human dentin.
    Dias WR; Pereira PN; Swift EJ
    J Adhes Dent; 2004; 6(3):195-203. PubMed ID: 15536849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Effect of rotary instruments on composites for coronal restoration. A proposed evaluation protocol for the effect of rotary instruments and surface conditions].
    Ache M; Goldberg M; Lefort A; Renaux P
    Cah Prothese; 1991 Jun; (74):56-68. PubMed ID: 1650285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of Smear Layers Created by Different Burs on Durability of Self-Etching Adhesive Bond to Dentin of Primary Teeth.
    Rirattanapong P; Senawongse P; Harnirattisal C; Wunsiw W
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2015; 39(3):224-30. PubMed ID: 26208066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of ultrasonic instruments on the quality of preparation margins and bonding to dentin.
    Ellis R; Bennani V; Purton D; Chandler N; Lowe B
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2012 Aug; 24(4):278-85. PubMed ID: 22863135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.