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

428 related items for PubMed ID: 8866262

  • 21. Microleakage in three designs of glass ionomer under composite resin restorations.
    Gordon M, Wasserstein A, Gorfil C, Imber S.
    J Oral Rehabil; 1991 Mar; 18(2):149-54. PubMed ID: 2037937
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results.
    Neme AL, Evans DB, Maxson BB.
    Oper Dent; 2000 Mar; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Artificial formed caries-like lesions around esthetic restorative materials.
    Attar N, Onen A.
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2002 Mar; 26(3):289-96. PubMed ID: 11990054
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Comparative quantitative and qualitative assessment of the marginal adaptation and apposition of bonded amalgam restorations using luting glass ionomer and 4-META adhesive liner under a scanning electron microscope. An in vitro study.
    Abraham MM, Sudeep PT, Bhat KS.
    Indian J Dent Res; 1999 Mar; 10(2):43-53. PubMed ID: 10865391
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Inhibition of demineralization in vitro around amalgam restorations.
    Pimenta LA, Fontana UF, Cury JA, Serra MC, Elderton RJ.
    Quintessence Int; 1998 Jun; 29(6):363-7. PubMed ID: 9728147
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Class II composite resin restorations using glass-ionomer liners: microleakage studies.
    Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E.
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1996 Jun; 21(1):67-70. PubMed ID: 9161210
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. Secondary caries formation in vitro around fluoride-releasing restorations.
    Dionysopoulos P, Kotsanos N, Koliniotou-Koubia, Papagodiannis Y.
    Oper Dent; 1994 Jun; 19(5):183-8. PubMed ID: 8700758
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Microleakage and retention of bonded amalgam restorations.
    Winkler MM, Moore BK, Rhodes B, Swartz M.
    Am J Dent; 2000 Oct; 13(5):245-50. PubMed ID: 11764110
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Bonded amalgam restorations: a comparative study of glass-ionomer and resin adhesives.
    al-Moayad M, Aboush YE, Elderton RJ.
    Br Dent J; 1993 Nov 20; 175(10):363-7. PubMed ID: 8257646
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. In vitro caries inhibition effects by conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer restorations.
    Tam LE, Chan GP, Yim D.
    Oper Dent; 1997 Nov 20; 22(1):4-14. PubMed ID: 9227122
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Retentive strength of an amalgam bonding agent: chemical vs light vs dual curing.
    Winkler MM, Rhodes B, Moore BK.
    Oper Dent; 2000 Nov 20; 25(6):505-11. PubMed ID: 11203863
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Kinetic cavity preparation effects on secondary caries formation around resin restorations: a polarized light microscopic in vitro evaluation.
    Hicks MJ, Parkins FM, Flaitz CM.
    ASDC J Dent Child; 2001 Nov 20; 68(2):115-21, 80, 142. PubMed ID: 11475686
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Streptococcus mutans-induced secondary caries adjacent to glass ionomer cement, composite resin and amalgam restorations in vitro.
    Gama-Teixeira A, Simionato MR, Elian SN, Sobral MA, Luz MA.
    Braz Oral Res; 2007 Nov 20; 21(4):368-74. PubMed ID: 18060266
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Glass-ionomer cement restorations and secondary caries: a preliminary report.
    Mjör IA.
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Mar 20; 27(3):171-4. PubMed ID: 9063229
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Margin Integrity and Secondary Caries of Lined or Non-lined Composite and Glass Hybrid Restorations After Selective Excavation In Vitro.
    Schwendicke F, Kniess J, Paris S, Blunck U.
    Oper Dent; 2017 Mar 20; 42(2):155-164. PubMed ID: 27802124
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. In vivo vs in vitro anticariogenic behavior of glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials.
    Papagiannoulis L, Kakaboura A, Eliades G.
    Dent Mater; 2002 Dec 20; 18(8):561-9. PubMed ID: 12385896
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Marginal leakage in class V composite resin restorations with glass ionomer liners in vitro.
    Mathis RS, DeWald JP, Moody CR, Ferracane JL.
    J Prosthet Dent; 1990 May 20; 63(5):522-5. PubMed ID: 2338665
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. The marginal seal of Class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer.
    Payne JH.
    J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1999 May 20; 23(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 10204453
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Experimental secondary caries around amalgam, composite and glass ionomer cement fillings in human teeth.
    Hotz PR.
    SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd; 1979 Sep 20; 89(9):965-86. PubMed ID: 293928
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Effect of a copal varnish, ZOE or glass ionomer cement bases on microleakage of amalgam restorations.
    Manders CA, Garcia-Godoy F, Barnwell GM.
    Am J Dent; 1990 Apr 20; 3(2):63-6. PubMed ID: 2076225
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 22.