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 *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9479921)

  • 1. The novel use of extracted teeth as a dental restorative material--the 'Natural Inlay'.
    Moscovich H; Creugers NH
    J Dent; 1998 Jan; 26(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 9479921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Human tooth tissue as dental restorative material].
    Moscovich H; Creugers NH
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1999 Jan; 106(1):10-4. PubMed ID: 11930836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Indirect posterior restorations using a new chairside microhybrid resin composite system.
    Tay FR; Wei SH
    J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):89-99. PubMed ID: 11317389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Adaptability and microleakage of indirect resin inlays: an in vivo investigation.
    Ferrari M; Mason PN
    Quintessence Int; 1993 Dec; 24(12):861-5. PubMed ID: 20830881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. In vitro milling accuracy and fit of 'natural inlays'.
    Moscovich H; Von den Hoff JW; Creugers NH; De Kanter RJ
    J Dent; 1998; 26(5-6):453-7. PubMed ID: 9699437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
    Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of different restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated molars.
    Cobankara FK; Unlu N; Cetin AR; Ozkan HB
    Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):526-33. PubMed ID: 18833859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A comparison of stresses in molar teeth restored with inlays and direct restorations, including polymerization shrinkage of composite resin and tooth loading during mastication.
    Dejak B; Młotkowski A
    Dent Mater; 2015 Mar; 31(3):e77-87. PubMed ID: 25544104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of different ceramic and composite materials on stress distribution in inlay and onlay cavities: 3-D finite element analysis.
    Yamanel K; Caglar A; Gülsahi K; Ozden UA
    Dent Mater J; 2009 Nov; 28(6):661-70. PubMed ID: 20019416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Marginal adaptation of a sintered ceramic inlay system before and after cementation.
    Gemalmaz D; Ozcan M; Yoruç AB; Alkumru HN
    J Oral Rehabil; 1997 Sep; 24(9):646-51. PubMed ID: 9357744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Microleakage of ceramic inlays luted with different resin cements and dentin adhesives.
    Uludag B; Ozturk O; Ozturk AN
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Oct; 102(4):235-41. PubMed ID: 19782826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Marginal leakage in direct and indirect composite resin restorations in primary teeth: an in vitro study.
    Ferreira MC; Vieira RS
    J Dent; 2008 May; 36(5):322-5. PubMed ID: 18336986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of the marginal adaptation of direct and indirect composite inlay restorations with optical coherence tomography.
    Türk AG; Sabuncu M; Ünal S; Önal B; Ulusoy M
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2016; 24(4):383-90. PubMed ID: 27556210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: an in vitro study.
    Desai PD; Das UK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):877. PubMed ID: 22484893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Marginal adaptation of Class V restorations using different restorative techniques.
    Krejci I; Lutz F
    J Dent; 1991 Feb; 19(1):24-32. PubMed ID: 1901872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Marginal adaptation of ceramic inserts after cementation.
    Ozcan M; Pfeiffer P; Nergiz I
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):132-6. PubMed ID: 11931135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Microleakage of direct and indirect inlay/onlay systems.
    Hasanreĭsoğlu U; Sönmez H; Uçtaşli S; Wilson HJ
    J Oral Rehabil; 1996 Jan; 23(1):66-71. PubMed ID: 8850164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.