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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9588153)

  • 1. Fracture resistance in conservative Class II cavity preparation: box vs tunnel.
    Khairy MA
    Egypt Dent J; 1994 Jul; 40(3):751-6. PubMed ID: 9588153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Fracture resistance of teeth directly and indirectly restored with composite resin and indirectly restored with ceramic materials.
    Dalpino PH; Francischone CE; Ishikiriama A; Franco EB
    Am J Dent; 2002 Dec; 15(6):389-94. PubMed ID: 12691276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Fracture resistance of the buccal cusps of root filled maxillary premolar teeth restored with various techniques.
    Siso SH; Hürmüzlü F; Turgut M; Altundaşar E; Serper A; Er K
    Int Endod J; 2007 Mar; 40(3):161-8. PubMed ID: 17305692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Influence of different transitional restorations on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
    Qualtrough AJ; Cawte SG; Wilson NH
    Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Marginal ridge strength of Class II tunnel restorations.
    Purk JH; Roberts RS; Elledge DA; Chappell RP; Eick JD
    Am J Dent; 1995 Apr; 8(2):75-9. PubMed ID: 7546482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Marginal ridge strength in Class II tunnel restorations.
    Fasbinder DJ; Davis RD; Burgess JO
    Am J Dent; 1991 Apr; 4(2):77-82. PubMed ID: 1854444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Compressive fracture resistance of the marginal ridge in large Class II tunnels restored with cermet and composite resin.
    Ehrnford LE; Fransson H
    Swed Dent J; 1994; 18(5):207-11. PubMed ID: 7871480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part I: fracture resistance and fracture mode.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Jan; 99(1):30-7. PubMed ID: 18182183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated premolars restored with glass ionomer cement or acid etch composite resin.
    Trope M; Tronstad L
    J Endod; 1991 Jun; 17(6):257-9. PubMed ID: 1940749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with direct and indirect adhesive techniques.
    Santos MJ; Bezerra RB
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2005 Sep; 71(8):585. PubMed ID: 16202199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution.
    Soares PV; Santos-Filho PC; Gomide HA; Araujo CA; Martins LR; Soares CJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):114-22. PubMed ID: 18262012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Fracture resistance of teeth with Class 2 silver amalgam, posterior composite, and glass cermet restorations.
    Jagadish S; Yogesh BG
    Oper Dent; 1990; 15(2):42-7. PubMed ID: 2374743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with different filling techniques.
    França FM; Worschech CC; Paulillo LA; Martins LR; Lovadino JR
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2005 Aug; 6(3):62-9. PubMed ID: 16127473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of fibre insertion on fracture resistance of root filled molar teeth with MOD preparations restored with composite.
    Belli S; Erdemir A; Ozcopur M; Eskitascioglu G
    Int Endod J; 2005 Feb; 38(2):73-80. PubMed ID: 15667628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Resistance of cavity walls of composite filled teeth].
    Fabianelli A; De Luca S; Garberoglio R
    Dent Cadmos; 1991 Sep; 59(13):94-100, 103-4. PubMed ID: 1824368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Fracture strength of Class I versus Class II restored premolars tested at the marginal ridge. I. Standard preparations.
    Purk JH; Eick JD; DeSchepper EJ; Chappell RP; Tira DE
    Quintessence Int; 1990 Jul; 21(7):545-51. PubMed ID: 2094853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Resistance to maxillary premolar fractures after restoration of class II preparations with resin composite or ceromer.
    de Freitas CR; Miranda MI; de Andrade MF; Flores VH; Vaz LG; Guimarães C
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Sep; 33(8):589-94. PubMed ID: 12238690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of restoration method on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
    Yamada Y; Tsubota Y; Fukushima S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):94-8. PubMed ID: 15008239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
    Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.