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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9304122)

  • 1. [Characterization of glass ionomer cements containing resin].
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 1996; 51(1):36-53. PubMed ID: 9304122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Characterization of resin-containing glass ionomers].
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 1996; 51(3):36-53. PubMed ID: 8848630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Mineral loss on adjacent enamel glass ionomer cements restorations after cariogenic and erosive challenges.
    Salas CF; Guglielmi CA; Raggio DP; Mendes FM
    Arch Oral Biol; 2011 Oct; 56(10):1014-9. PubMed ID: 21489401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Properties of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials and two polyacid-modified resin composite materials.
    Attin T; Vataschki M; Hellwig E
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Mar; 27(3):203-9. PubMed ID: 9063235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Long-term strength of aesthetic restoratives.
    Frankel N; Pearson GJ; Labella R
    J Oral Rehabil; 1998 Feb; 25(2):89-93. PubMed ID: 9576590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of the flexural strength of six reinforced restorative materials.
    Cohen BI; Volovich Y; Musikant BL; Deutsch AS
    Gen Dent; 2001; 49(5):484-8. PubMed ID: 12017792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessment of laminate technique using glass ionomer and resin composite for restoration of root filled teeth.
    Taha NA; Palamara JE; Messer HH
    J Dent; 2012 Aug; 40(8):617-23. PubMed ID: 22521705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Restorative materials.
    Mount GJ
    Aust Dent J; 1999 Jun; 44(2):138. PubMed ID: 10452172
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Direct and indirect adhesive restorative materials: a review.
    Kugel G
    Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):35D-40D. PubMed ID: 11763916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fracture toughness of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials: effect of powder/liquid ratio and powder particle size reduction on fracture toughness.
    Mitsuhashi A; Hanaoka K; Teranaka T
    Dent Mater; 2003 Dec; 19(8):747-57. PubMed ID: 14511733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies.
    Aggarwal V; Singla M; Yadav S; Yadav H
    J Dent; 2014 May; 42(5):619-25. PubMed ID: 24631232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-and-rinse and self-etch dentin adhesive systems.
    Kasraei S; Azarsina M; Majidi S
    Oper Dent; 2011; 36(2):213-21. PubMed ID: 21702678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of bracket debonding force between two conventional resin adhesives and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: an in vitro and in vivo study.
    Shammaa I; Ngan P; Kim H; Kao E; Gladwin M; Gunel E; Brown C
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Oct; 69(5):463-9. PubMed ID: 10515145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of cariogenic biofilm challenge on the surface hardness of direct restorative materials in situ.
    Barbosa RP; Pereira-Cenci T; Silva WM; Coelho-de-Souza FH; Demarco FF; Cenci MS
    J Dent; 2012 May; 40(5):359-63. PubMed ID: 22326721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Laboratory evaluation of a compomer and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement for orthodontic bonding.
    Millett DT; Cattanach D; McFadzean R; Pattison J; McColl J
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Feb; 69(1):58-63; discussion 64. PubMed ID: 10022186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
    Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cuspal deflection in premolar teeth restored using current composite resins with and without resin-modified glass ionomer liner.
    Karaman E; Ozgunaltay G
    Oper Dent; 2013; 38(3):282-9. PubMed ID: 23092141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of erosive pH cycling on different restorative materials and on enamel restored with these materials.
    Francisconi LF; Honório HM; Rios D; Magalhães AC; Machado MA; Buzalaf MA
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(2):203-8. PubMed ID: 18435196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of configuration factor on gap formation in hybrid composite resin, low-shrinkage composite resin and resin-modified glass ionomer.
    Boroujeni PM; Mousavinasab SM; Hasanli E
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2015 May; 6(2):156-60. PubMed ID: 24415719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.