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 *

311 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9448347)

  • 1. Ultraconservative and cariostatic sealed restorations: results at year 10.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Curtis JW; Ergle JW; Rueggeberg FA; Adair SM
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1998 Jan; 129(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 9448347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cariostatic and ultraconservative sealed restorations: six-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Smith CD; Williams JE; Sherrer JD; Mackert JR; Richards EE; Schuster GS; O'Dell NL; Pierce KL; Kovarik RE
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Dec; 23(12):827-38. PubMed ID: 1305301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical performance of sealed composite restorations placed over caries compared with sealed and unsealed amalgam restorations.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Call-Smith KM; Shuster GS; Williams JE; Davis QB; Smith CD; Bell RA; Sherrer JD; Myers DR; Morse PK
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1987 Nov; 115(5):689-94. PubMed ID: 3479490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cariostatic and ultraconservative sealed restorations: nine-year results among children and adults.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Adair SM; Sams DR; Curtis JW; Ergle JW; Hawkins KI; Mackert JR; O'Dell NL; Richards EE; Rueggeberg F
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1995; 62(2):97-107. PubMed ID: 7608378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sealed restorations: 5-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Richards EE; Williams JE; Smith CD; Mackert JR; Schuster GS; Sherrer JD; O'Dell NL; Pierce KL; Wenner KK
    Am J Dent; 1992 Feb; 5(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 1524744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Ultraconservative sealed restorations: three-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Williams JE; Schuster GS; Smith CD; Pierce KL; Mackert JR; Sherrer JD; Wenner KK; Davis QB; Garman TA
    J Public Health Dent; 1991; 51(4):239-50. PubMed ID: 1941777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sealed restorations: 4-year results.
    Mertz-Fairhurst EJ; Williams JE; Pierce KL; Smith CD; Schuster GS; Mackert JR; Sherrer JD; Wenner KK; Richards EE; Davis QB
    Am J Dent; 1991 Feb; 4(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 2003895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The performance of bonded vs. pin-retained complex amalgam restorations: a five-year clinical evaluation.
    Summitt JB; Burgess JO; Berry TG; Robbins JW; Osborne JW; Haveman CW
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 Jul; 132(7):923-31. PubMed ID: 11480646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
    Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
    J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Microleakage and wall adaptation of conservative restorations.
    Guelmann M; Bonnin S; Primosch RE; Söderholm KJ
    Am J Dent; 2002 Dec; 15(6):407-11. PubMed ID: 12691279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Management of extensive carious lesions in permanent molars of a child with nonmetallic bonded restorations--a case report.
    el-Mowafy O
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2000 Jun; 66(6):302-7. PubMed ID: 10927895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure.
    Hickel R; Manhart J
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):45-64. PubMed ID: 11317384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An in vitro study on the secondary caries-prevention properties of three restorative materials.
    Lai GY; Zhu LK; Li MY; Wang J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):363-8. PubMed ID: 23998624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in small to moderate-sized Class II preparations of conventional design.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2000 May; 31(5):347-52. PubMed ID: 11203946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth: three-year results.
    Qvist V; Laurberg L; Poulsen A; Teglers PT
    J Dent Res; 1997 Jul; 76(7):1387-96. PubMed ID: 9207772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A two-year randomized, controlled clinical evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations.
    Setcos JC; Staninec M; Wilson NH
    J Adhes Dent; 1999; 1(4):323-31. PubMed ID: 11725662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Benefits and disadvantages of tooth-coloured alternatives to amalgam.
    Roulet JF
    J Dent; 1997 Nov; 25(6):459-73. PubMed ID: 9604577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 1.
    Hilton TJ
    Am J Dent; 2002 Jun; 15(3):198-210. PubMed ID: 12469759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Swedish dentists' decisions on preparation techniques and restorative materials.
    Sundberg H; Mejàre I; Espelid I; Tveit AB
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2000 Jun; 58(3):135-41. PubMed ID: 10933563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW
    J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.