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.
6. Effects of cements and eugenol on properties of a visible light-cured composite. Powell TL; Huget EF Pediatr Dent; 1993; 15(2):104-7. PubMed ID: 8327359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Bond strength of luting cements to core foundation materials. Hewlett S; Wadenya RO; Mante FK Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2010 Mar; 31(2):140-6. PubMed ID: 20344899 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of dentin conditioning on bond strength of light-cured ionomer restorative materials and polyacid-modified composite resins. Buchalla W; Attin T; Hellwig E J Clin Dent; 1996; 7(4):81-4. PubMed ID: 9238882 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The influence of long term water immersion on shear bond strength of amalgam repaired by resin composite and mediated by adhesives or resin modified glass ionomers. Pilo R; Nissan J; Shafir H; Shapira G; Alter E; Brosh T J Dent; 2012 Jul; 40(7):594-602. PubMed ID: 22504527 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Maximum bond strength of dental luting cement to amalgam alloy. Mojon P; Hawbolt EB; MacEntee MI; Belser UC J Dent Res; 1989 Nov; 68(11):1545-9. PubMed ID: 2685070 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparative study of three glass ionomer base materials. Burgess JO; Barghi N; Chan DC; Hummert T Am J Dent; 1993 Jun; 6(3):137-41. PubMed ID: 8240775 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of retentiveness of amalgam bonding agent types. Winkler MM; Moore BK; Allen J; Rhodes B Oper Dent; 1997; 22(5):200-8. PubMed ID: 9484142 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Strength of base materials. Carvalho RM; Del'Hoyo RB; Suga RS Am J Dent; 1995 Jun; 8(3):128-30. PubMed ID: 8599588 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. In vitro microleakage of luting cements and crown foundation material. Lindquist TJ; Connolly J J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Mar; 85(3):292-8. PubMed ID: 11264938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Retention strengths of five luting cements on prefabricated dowels after root canal obturation with a zinc oxide/eugenol sealer: 1. Dowel space preparation/cementation at one week after obturation. Hagge MS; Wong RD; Lindemuth JS J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):168-75. PubMed ID: 12237797 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation. Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations. Bernal G; Okamura M; Muñoz CA J Prosthodont; 2003 Jun; 12(2):111-5. PubMed ID: 12964683 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results. Neme AL; Evans DB; Maxson BB Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Bond strength of glass-ionomer cement and composite resin combinations. Oilo G; Um CM Quintessence Int; 1992 Sep; 23(9):633-9. PubMed ID: 1287716 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]