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 *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9545897)

  • 21. Microleakage of Class II composite restorations.
    Wibowo G; Stockton L
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):177-85. PubMed ID: 11572297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of cutting patterns produced in primary teeth by an air-abrasion system.
    Peruchi C; Santos-Pinto L; Santos-Pinto A; Barbosa e Silva E
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Apr; 33(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 11989377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effect of light source position and bevel placement on facial margin adaptation of resin-based composite restorations.
    Hoelscher DC; Gregory WA; Linger JB; Pink FE
    Am J Dent; 2000 Aug; 13(4):171-5. PubMed ID: 11763925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Split mouth randomized controlled clinical trial of beveled cavity preparations in primary molars: an 18-Month follow up.
    Oliveira CA; Dias PF; Dos Santos MP; Maia LC
    J Dent; 2008 Sep; 36(9):754-8. PubMed ID: 18579283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Patient preference: conventional rotary handpieces or air abrasion for cavity preparation.
    Malmström HS; Chaves Y; Moss ME
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(6):667-71. PubMed ID: 14653278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Class II composite resin restorations with two polymerization techniques: relationship between microtensile bond strength and marginal leakage.
    Cenci M; Demarco F; de Carvalho R
    J Dent; 2005 Aug; 33(7):603-10. PubMed ID: 16005800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluation of the clinical behavior of resin modified glass ionomer cement on primary molars: a comparative one-year study.
    Prabhakar AR; Raju OS; Kurthukoti AJ; Satish V
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Feb; 9(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 18264535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparison of marginal microleakage of flowable composite restorations in primary molars prepared by high-speed carbide bur, Er:YAG laser, and air abrasion.
    Borsatto MC; Corona SA; Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; de Sá Rocha RA; Pecora JD; Palma-Dibb RG
    J Dent Child (Chic); 2006; 73(2):122-6. PubMed ID: 16948375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Influence of kinetic cavity preparation devices on dental topography: an in vitro study.
    Antunes LA; Vieira AS; Alves Dos Santos MP; Maia LC
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Feb; 9(2):146-54. PubMed ID: 18264537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Effect of handpiece tip design on the cutting efficiency of an air abrasion system.
    Santos-Pinto L; Peruchi C; Marker VA; Cordeiro R
    Am J Dent; 2001 Dec; 14(6):397-401. PubMed ID: 11949801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Preparation for invasive pit and fissure sealing: air-abrasion or bur?
    Kramer N; García-Godoy F; Lohbauer U; Schneider K; Assmann I; Frankenberger R
    Am J Dent; 2008 Dec; 21(6):383-7. PubMed ID: 19146132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Microleakage of Class V restorations using two different compomer systems: an in vitro study.
    Estafan D; Pines MS; Erakin C; Fuerst PF
    J Clin Dent; 1999; 10(4):124-6. PubMed ID: 10825860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Demineralization inhibition of direct tooth-colored restorative materials.
    Gonzalez Ede H; Yap AU; Hsu SC
    Oper Dent; 2004; 29(5):578-85. PubMed ID: 15470881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Influence of air abrasion preparation on microleakage in glass ionomer cement restorations.
    Reis Lda S; Chinelatti MA; Corona SA; Palma-Dibb RG; Borsatto MC
    J Mater Sci Mater Med; 2004 Nov; 15(11):1213-6. PubMed ID: 15880930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of Class V composite restorations: three-year results.
    Baratieri LN; Canabarro S; Lopes GC; Ritter AV
    Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):482-7. PubMed ID: 14531591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Microleakage and retention of bonded amalgam restorations.
    Winkler MM; Moore BK; Rhodes B; Swartz M
    Am J Dent; 2000 Oct; 13(5):245-50. PubMed ID: 11764110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effect of two different restorative techniques using resin-based composites on microleakage.
    Aranha AC; Pimenta LA
    Am J Dent; 2004 Apr; 17(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 15151335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Cavity design and marginal degradation of the occlusal part of Class-II amalgam restorations.
    Jokstad A; Mjör IA
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1990 Dec; 48(6):389-97. PubMed ID: 2288211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effect of adhesive systems and bevel on enamel margin integrity in primary and permanent teeth.
    Swanson TK; Feigal RJ; Tantbirojn D; Hodges JS
    Pediatr Dent; 2008; 30(2):134-40. PubMed ID: 18481578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Influence of flowable liner and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites.
    Tredwin CJ; Stokes A; Moles DR
    Oper Dent; 2005; 30(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 15765955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.