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

244 related items for PubMed ID: 18792703

  • 1. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer, nanohybrid and nanofill composite restorative systems in posterior teeth.
    Mahmoud SH, El-Embaby AE, AbdAllah AM, Hamama HH.
    J Adhes Dent; 2008 Aug; 10(4):315-22. PubMed ID: 18792703
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Clinical performance of ormocer, nanofilled, and nanoceramic resin composites in Class I and Class II restorations: a three-year evaluation.
    Mahmoud SH, El-Embaby AE, AbdAllah AM.
    Oper Dent; 2014 Aug; 39(1):32-42. PubMed ID: 23614660
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner.
    Efes BG, Dörter C, Gömeç Y, Koray F.
    J Adhes Dent; 2006 Apr; 8(2):119-26. PubMed ID: 16708724
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars with class II MOD cavities restored with Ormocer, Nanofilled, and Nanoceramic composite restorative systems.
    Taha DG, Abdel-Samad AA, Mahmoud SH.
    Quintessence Int; 2011 Apr; 42(7):579-87. PubMed ID: 21716986
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled composite in posterior teeth: 12-month results.
    Dresch W, Volpato S, Gomes JC, Ribeiro NR, Reis A, Loguercio AD.
    Oper Dent; 2006 Apr; 31(4):409-17. PubMed ID: 16924980
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. A prospective randomised clinical trial of one bis-GMA-based and two ormocer-based composite restorative systems in class II cavities: three-year results.
    Bottenberg P, Alaerts M, Keulemans F.
    J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):163-71. PubMed ID: 16963171
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Monomer elution from nanohybrid and ormocer-based composites cured with different light sources.
    Manojlovic D, Radisic M, Vasiljevic T, Zivkovic S, Lausevic M, Miletic V.
    Dent Mater; 2011 Apr; 27(4):371-8. PubMed ID: 21168907
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Clinical evaluation of an ormocer, a nanofill composite and a hybrid composite at 2 years.
    Efes BG, Dörter C, Gömeç Y.
    Am J Dent; 2006 Aug; 19(4):236-40. PubMed ID: 16939030
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Randomized 3-year clinical evaluation of Class I and II posterior resin restorations placed with a bulk-fill resin composite and a one-step self-etching adhesive.
    van Dijken JW, Pallesen U.
    J Adhes Dent; 2015 Feb; 17(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 25625133
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Marginal adaptation of ormocer-, silorane-, and methacrylate-based composite restorative systems bonded to dentin cavities after water storage.
    Mahmoud SH, Al-Wakeel Eel S.
    Quintessence Int; 2011 Feb; 42(10):e131-9. PubMed ID: 22026005
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.
    Arhun N, Celik C, Yamanel K.
    Oper Dent; 2010 Feb; 35(4):397-404. PubMed ID: 20672723
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. The effect of two different polishing techniques on microleakage of new composites in Class V restorations.
    Yalçin F, Korkmaz Y, Başeren M.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Nov 01; 7(5):18-25. PubMed ID: 17091136
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. A three-year prospective randomized study of silorane- and methacrylate-based composite restorative systems in class II restorations.
    Mahmoud SH, Ali AK, Hegazi HA.
    J Adhes Dent; 2014 Jun 01; 16(3):285-92. PubMed ID: 24779025
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Impact of refrigeration of different Resin composite restorative materials on the marginal adaptation in class II restorations.
    El-Maksoud OA, Hamama H, Wafaie RA, El-Wassefy N, Mahmoud SH.
    BMC Oral Health; 2024 Oct 03; 24(1):1174. PubMed ID: 39363215
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Microleakage of different resin composite types.
    Yazici AR, Celik C, Ozgünaltay G.
    Quintessence Int; 2004 Oct 03; 35(10):790-4. PubMed ID: 15553287
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. A randomized 10-year prospective follow-up of Class II nanohybrid and conventional hybrid resin composite restorations.
    van Dijken JW, Pallesen U.
    J Adhes Dent; 2014 Dec 03; 16(6):585-92. PubMed ID: 25516885
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Marginal and internal adaptation of Class II ormocer and hybrid resin composite restorations before and after load cycling.
    Kournetas N, Chakmakchi M, Kakaboura A, Rahiotis C, Geis-Gerstorfer J.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2004 Sep 03; 8(3):123-9. PubMed ID: 15248053
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Ten-year Clinical Performance of Posterior Resin Composite Restorations.
    Krämer N, Reinelt C, Frankenberger R.
    J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug 03; 17(5):433-41. PubMed ID: 26525008
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Thirty-Six-Month Clinical Comparison of Bulk Fill and Nanofill Composite Restorations.
    Yazici AR, Antonson SA, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E.
    Oper Dent; 2017 Aug 03; 42(5):478-485. PubMed ID: 28581919
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 13.