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 *

210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9413909)

  • 21. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
    Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Computer-aided direct ceramic restorations: a 10-year prospective clinical study of Cerec CAD/CAM inlays and onlays.
    Otto T; De Nisco S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2002; 15(2):122-8. PubMed ID: 11951800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A 3-year follow-up study of preformed beta-quartz glass-ceramic insert restorations.
    Sjögren G; Hedlund SO; Jonsson C; Sandström A
    Quintessence Int; 2000 Jan; 31(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 11203902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Computer-designed inlays after 5 years in situ: clinical performance and scanning electron microscopic evaluation.
    Mörmann W; Krejci I
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Feb; 23(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 1641451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. In vivo and in vitro evaluation of marginal fit of class II ceromer inlays.
    Gemalmaz D; Kükrer D
    J Oral Rehabil; 2006 Jun; 33(6):436-42. PubMed ID: 16671990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Clinical and semiquantitative marginal analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years.
    Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Inokoshi S; Willems G; Braem M; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G
    J Dent; 1995 Dec; 23(6):329-38. PubMed ID: 8530722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Dentin bond strengths of two ceramic inlay systems after cementation with three different techniques and one bonding system.
    Ozturk N; Aykent F
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):275-81. PubMed ID: 12644803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations.
    Krämer N; Lohbauer U; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):60D-76D. PubMed ID: 11763920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Marginal breakdown of 5-year-old direct composite inlays.
    van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P
    J Dent; 1996 Nov; 24(6):389-94. PubMed ID: 8990682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A 3-year study of inlays milled from machinable ceramic blocks representing 2 different inlay systems.
    Thordrup M; Isidor F; Hörsted-Bindslev P
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Dec; 30(12):829-36. PubMed ID: 10765860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A 10-year prospective evaluation of CAD/CAM-manufactured (Cerec) ceramic inlays cemented with a chemically cured or dual-cured resin composite.
    Sjögren G; Molin M; van Dijken JW
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(2):241-6. PubMed ID: 15119879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Ceramic inlays bonded with two adhesives after 4 years.
    Krämer N; Ebert J; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
    Dent Mater; 2006 Jan; 22(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 16122784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. In vitro evaluation of push-out bond strength of direct ceramic inlays to tooth surface with fiber-reinforced composite at the interface.
    Cekic I; Ergun G; Uctasli S; Lassila LV
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 May; 97(5):271-8. PubMed ID: 17547945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Antagonist enamel wears more than ceramic inlays.
    Krämer N; Kunzelmann KH; Taschner M; Mehl A; Garcia-Godoy F; Frankenberger R
    J Dent Res; 2006 Dec; 85(12):1097-100. PubMed ID: 17122161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Marginal adaptation of Cerec 3 CAD/CAM composite crowns using two different finish line preparation designs.
    Akbar JH; Petrie CS; Walker MP; Williams K; Eick JD
    J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(3):155-63. PubMed ID: 16681497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: two-year clinical follow up.
    Coelho Santos MJ; Mondelli RF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 15088722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Interfacial gaps following ceramic inlay cementation vs direct composites.
    Iida K; Inokoshi S; Kurosaki N
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(4):445-52. PubMed ID: 12877431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Enamel wear of modified porcelains.
    Imai Y; Suzuki S; Fukushima S
    Am J Dent; 2000 Dec; 13(6):315-23. PubMed ID: 11764126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Marginal breakdown of fired ceramic inlays cemented with glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement or resin composite.
    van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P
    J Dent; 1994 Oct; 22(5):265-72. PubMed ID: 7962904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.