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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

468 related items for PubMed ID: 11203844

  • 1. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
    Aboush YE, Torabzadeh H.
    Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 6-year results.
    Busato AL, Loguercio AD, Reis A, Carrilho MR.
    Am J Dent; 2001 Oct; 14(5):304-8. PubMed ID: 11803995
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations.
    Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, Mortazavi F.
    Oper Dent; 1997 Oct; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 9227124
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.
    Ermiş RB.
    Quintessence Int; 2002 Oct; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 7. Adaptation of Class II Vitremer restorations with and without primer: a morphometric study.
    Gleicher H, Fuks AB, Sela J.
    Pediatr Dent; 1998 Jun; 20(4):263-6. PubMed ID: 9783297
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Clinical comparison of Class V resin composite and glass ionomer restorations.
    Powell LV, Gordon GE, Johnson GH.
    Am J Dent; 1992 Oct; 5(5):249-52. PubMed ID: 1299249
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite.
    Attin T, Opatowski A, Meyer C, Zingg-Meyer B, Buchalla W, Mönting JS.
    Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 11572292
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
    Banomyong D, Harnirattisai C, Burrow MF.
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions.
    van Dijken JW, Pallesen U.
    Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):915-22. PubMed ID: 18155288
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Influence of the restorative technique and new adhesives on the dentin marginal seal and adaptation of resin composite Class II restorations: an in vitro evaluation.
    Dietschi D, De Siebenthal G, Neveu-Rosenstand L, Holz J.
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Oct; 26(10):717-27. PubMed ID: 8935115
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.
    Lindberg A, van Dijken JW, Lindberg M.
    J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):124-9. PubMed ID: 16956709
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Class II restorations with a polyacid-modified composite resin in primary molars placed in a dental practice: results of a two-year clinical evaluation.
    Attin T, Opatowski A, Meyer C, Zingg-Meyer B, Mönting JS.
    Oper Dent; 2000 Feb; 25(4):259-64. PubMed ID: 11203828
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. The effect of rebonding on microleakage of class V aesthetic restorations.
    Erhardt MC, Magalhães CS, Serra MC.
    Oper Dent; 2002 Feb; 27(4):396-402. PubMed ID: 12120778
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material.
    Brackett WW, Browning WD, Ross JA, Brackett MG.
    Oper Dent; 2001 Feb; 26(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 11203770
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.
    Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JR, Navarro MF, de Carvalho RM.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May 01; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-month results.
    Alves dos Santos MP, Luiz RR, Maia LC.
    J Dent; 2010 Jun 01; 38(6):451-9. PubMed ID: 20188783
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
    van Dijken JW.
    J Dent; 2010 Jun 01; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Microleakage of Class V composite, resin sandwich, and resin-modified glass ionomers.
    Trushkowsky RD, Gwinnett AJ.
    Am J Dent; 1996 Jun 01; 9(3):96-9. PubMed ID: 9002797
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 24.