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

Journal Abstract Search


261 related items for PubMed ID: 15237878

  • 1. Fatigue resistance of teeth restored with cuspal-coverage composite restorations.
    Fennis WM, Kuijs RH, Kreulen CM, Verdonschot N, Creugers NH.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(3):313-7. PubMed ID: 15237878
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Thickness of CAD-CAM composite resin overlays influences fatigue resistance of endodontically treated premolars.
    Magne P, Knezevic A.
    Dent Mater; 2009 Oct; 25(10):1264-8. PubMed ID: 19539358
    [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 Oct; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. A comparison of fatigue resistance of three materials for cusp-replacing adhesive restorations.
    Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, Roeters FJ, Verdonschot N, Creugers NH.
    J Dent; 2006 Jan; 34(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 15935540
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 9. Cuspal deflection of maxillary premolars restored with bonded amalgam.
    el-Badrawy WA.
    Oper Dent; 1999 Mar; 24(6):337-43. PubMed ID: 10823082
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with extensive composite resin restorations.
    Plotino G, Buono L, Grande NM, Lamorgese V, Somma F.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Mar; 99(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 18319094
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations.
    Shor A, Nicholls JI, Phillips KM, Libman WJ.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003 Mar; 16(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 12675458
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. In vitro fracture resistance of fiber reinforced cusp-replacing composite restorations.
    Fennis WM, Tezvergil A, Kuijs RH, Lassila LV, Kreulen CM, Creugers NH, Vallittu PK.
    Dent Mater; 2005 Jun; 21(6):565-72. PubMed ID: 15904700
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The influence of cavity preparation design on fracture strength and mode of fracture of laboratory-processed composite resin restorations.
    Fonseca RB, Fernandes-Neto AJ, Correr-Sobrinho L, Soares CJ.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Oct; 98(4):277-84. PubMed ID: 17936127
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Fracture strength of cusp replacing resin composite restorations.
    Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, Roeters JJ, Burgersdijk RC.
    Am J Dent; 2003 Feb; 16(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 12744406
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Influence of endodontic treatment, post insertion, and ceramic restoration on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars.
    Bitter K, Meyer-Lueckel H, Fotiadis N, Blunck U, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM, Paris S.
    Int Endod J; 2010 Jun; 43(6):469-77. PubMed ID: 20536574
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]


    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 14.