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
152 related items for PubMed ID: 11214759
1. Surface characteristics and in vitro biofilm formation on glass ionomer and composite resin. Carlén A, Nikdel K, Wennerberg A, Holmberg K, Olsson J. Biomaterials; 2001 Mar; 22(5):481-7. PubMed ID: 11214759 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Influence of surface roughness on streptococcal adhesion forces to composite resins. Mei L, Busscher HJ, van der Mei HC, Ren Y. Dent Mater; 2011 Aug; 27(8):770-8. PubMed ID: 21524789 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. In vitro bacterial adherence onto pellicle-coated aesthetic restorative materials. Shahal Y, Steinberg D, Hirschfeld Z, Bronshteyn M, Kopolovic K. J Oral Rehabil; 1998 Jan; 25(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 9502127 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of in vitro Streptococcus mutans and Actinomyces naeslundii attachment and growth on restorative materials surfaces. Wei CX, Leung WK, Burrow MF. Aust Dent J; 2019 Dec; 64(4):365-375. PubMed ID: 31442307 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. An in vitro comparison of the effects of various air polishing powders on enamel and selected esthetic restorative materials. Barnes CM, Covey D, Watanabe H, Simetich B, Schulte JR, Chen H. J Clin Dent; 2014 Dec; 25(4):76-87. PubMed ID: 26054183 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Biofilm formation and release of fluoride from dental restorative materials in relation to their surface properties. Hahnel S, Ionescu AC, Cazzaniga G, Ottobelli M, Brambilla E. J Dent; 2017 May; 60():14-24. PubMed ID: 28212980 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of different finishing techniques for restorative materials on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion. Aykent F, Yondem I, Ozyesil AG, Gunal SK, Avunduk MC, Ozkan S. J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Apr; 103(4):221-7. PubMed ID: 20362765 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The effects of surface roughness of composite resin on biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans in the presence of saliva. Park JW, Song CW, Jung JH, Ahn SJ, Ferracane JL. Oper Dent; 2012 Apr; 37(5):532-9. PubMed ID: 22339385 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [Influence of surface roughness on oral streptococcal adhesion forces to dental filling materials]. Sainan Z, Li J, Lei Z, Liying H, Lu Y, Wei L. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Oct 01; 34(5):448-453. PubMed ID: 28326699 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of Vital Tooth Bleaching on Surface Roughness and Streptococcal Biofilm Formation on Direct Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials. Wongpraparatana I, Matangkasombut O, Thanyasrisung P, Panich M. Oper Dent; 2018 Oct 01; 43(1):51-59. PubMed ID: 28976842 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Plaque formation in vivo and bacterial attachment in vitro on permanently hydrophobic and hydrophilic surfaces. Olsson J, van der Heijde Y, Holmberg K. Caries Res; 1992 Oct 01; 26(6):428-33. PubMed ID: 1294302 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Proteomic profile of in situ acquired pellicle on tooth and restorative material surfaces. Hu H, Burrow MF, Leung WK. J Dent; 2023 Feb 01; 129():104389. PubMed ID: 36526084 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of prophylactic polishing protocols on the surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Neme AL, Frazier KB, Roeder LB, Debner TL. Oper Dent; 2002 Feb 01; 27(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 11817469 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Bioactive resin-based composite with surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer filler and zwitterionic material to prevent the formation of multi-species biofilm. Lee MJ, Kwon JS, Kim JY, Ryu JH, Seo JY, Jang S, Kim KM, Hwang CJ, Choi SH. Dent Mater; 2019 Sep 01; 35(9):1331-1341. PubMed ID: 31320183 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Contouring, finishing, and polishing Class 5 restorative materials. Hondrum SO, Fernández R. Oper Dent; 1997 Sep 01; 22(1):30-6. PubMed ID: 9227125 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of configuration factor on gap formation in hybrid composite resin, low-shrinkage composite resin and resin-modified glass ionomer. Boroujeni PM, Mousavinasab SM, Hasanli E. J Investig Clin Dent; 2015 May 01; 6(2):156-60. PubMed ID: 24415719 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations. Toledano M, Osorio E, Osorio R, García-Godoy F. J Prosthet Dent; 1999 May 01; 81(5):610-5. PubMed ID: 10220667 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Effect of different polishing techniques on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion of three glass ionomer-based restorative materials: In vitro study. Ismail HS, Ali AI, Abo El-Ella MA, Mahmoud SH. J Clin Exp Dent; 2020 Jul 01; 12(7):e620-e625. PubMed ID: 32905005 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Early formation of Streptococcus sobrinus biofilm on various dental restorative materials. Steinberg D, Eyal S. J Dent; 2002 Jan 01; 30(1):47-51. PubMed ID: 11741735 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of polishing systems on stain susceptibility and surface roughness of nanocomposite resin material. Barakah HM, Taher NM. J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Sep 01; 112(3):625-31. PubMed ID: 24721503 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]