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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9448798)

  • 1. Current materials and techniques for direct restorations in posterior teeth. Part 1: Silver amalgam.
    Dunne SM; Gainsford ID; Wilson NH
    Int Dent J; 1997 Jun; 47(3):123-36. PubMed ID: 9448798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?].
    De Moor R; Delmé K
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive agents with dye under vacuum: an in vitro study.
    Parolia A; Kundabala M; Gupta V; Verma M; Batra C; Shenoy R; Srikant N
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(2):252-5. PubMed ID: 21891895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The future of dental amalgam: a review of the literature. Part 7: Possible alternative materials to amalgam for the restoration of posterior teeth.
    Eley BM
    Br Dent J; 1997 Jul; 183(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 9254957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Factors relating to usage patterns of amalgam and resin composite for posterior restorations--a prospective analysis.
    Khalaf ME; Alomari QD; Omar R
    J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):785-92. PubMed ID: 24769386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cost-effectiveness of composite resins and amalgam in the replacement of amalgam Class II restorations.
    Tobi H; Kreulen CM; Vondeling H; van Amerongen WE
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1999 Apr; 27(2):137-43. PubMed ID: 10226724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Composite resin-amalgam compound restorations.
    Franchi M; Trisi P; Montanari G; Piattelli A
    Quintessence Int; 1994 Aug; 25(8):577-82. PubMed ID: 7568708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 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. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations.
    Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Gallium: an alternative for amalgam?].
    Schuurs AH; Davidson CL
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1997 Apr; 104(4):142-5. PubMed ID: 11924385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Adhesives, silver amalgam.
    Oral Health; 1995 Sep; 85(9):49-50, 52. PubMed ID: 8779743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Five-year performance of high-copper content amalgam restorations in a multiclinical trial of a posterior composite.
    Wilson NH; Wastell DG; Norman RD
    J Dent; 1996 May; 24(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 8675791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Direct placement restorative materials for use in posterior teeth: the current options.
    Lyons K;
    N Z Dent J; 2003 Mar; 99(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 15330384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in posterior teeth of young Finnish adults.
    Palotie U; Vehkalahti M
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2002 Dec; 60(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12512880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.