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.
121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1059657)
1. In vitro wear response of composite resin, amalgam, and enamel. Powell JM; Phillips RW; Norman RD J Dent Res; 1975; 54(6):1183-95. PubMed ID: 1059657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bond strength comparison of amalgam repair protocols using resin composite in situations with and without dentin exposure. Ozcan M; Schoonbeek G; Gökçe B; Cömlekoglu E; Dündar M Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):655-62. PubMed ID: 21180005 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Wear patterns of composite restorative resins in vivo; observations by scanning electron microscopy. Xu HC; Tong W; Song SQ J Oral Rehabil; 1985 Sep; 12(5):389-400. PubMed ID: 3862798 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An in vitro investigation into the wear effects of selected restorative materials on enamel. Jagger DC; Harrison A J Oral Rehabil; 1995 Apr; 22(4):275-81. PubMed ID: 7769526 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Two-body wear rate of CAD/CAM resin blocks and their enamel antagonists. Stawarczyk B; Özcan M; Trottmann A; Schmutz F; Roos M; Hämmerle C J Prosthet Dent; 2013 May; 109(5):325-32. PubMed ID: 23684283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Support of undermined occlusal enamel provided by restorative materials. Latino C; Troendle K; Summitt JB Quintessence Int; 2001 Apr; 32(4):287-91. PubMed ID: 12066648 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Wear of human enamel opposing monolithic zirconia, glass ceramic, and composite resin: an in vitro study. Sripetchdanond J; Leevailoj C J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Nov; 112(5):1141-50. PubMed ID: 24980740 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Composites versus amalgam: comparative measurements of abrasion resistance in vivo: 1-year results]. Meier C; Lutz F SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd; 1979 Mar; 89(3):203-12. PubMed ID: 293032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Black or white--Which choice for the molars? Part 2. Which does one choose for the restoration of posterior teeth: amalgam or composite?]. De Moor R; Delmé K Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):135-46. PubMed ID: 19227687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of erosive pH cycling on different restorative materials and on enamel restored with these materials. Francisconi LF; Honório HM; Rios D; Magalhães AC; Machado MA; Buzalaf MA Oper Dent; 2008; 33(2):203-8. PubMed ID: 18435196 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations. Johnson GH; Bales DJ; Gordon GE; Powell LV Quintessence Int; 1992 Oct; 23(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 1289954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Attrition at the enamel-restoration interface. Chowdhury MU; Kobayashi K; Uchiyama Y Asian J Aesthet Dent; 1995; 3():23-30. PubMed ID: 9063106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. In vitro wear behavior of restorative resin composites against bovine enamel. Tanaka K; Someya T; Kawada E; Ohyama T; Yoshinari M; Takemoto S; Hattori M Dent Mater J; 2020 Dec; 39(6):915-923. PubMed ID: 31694995 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of different surface conditioning methods on the bond strength of composite resin to amalgam. Ozcan M; Koolman C; Aladag A; Dündar M Oper Dent; 2011; 36(3):318-25. PubMed ID: 21740243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Surface wear on cervical restorations and adjacent enamel and root cementum caused by simulated long-term maintenance therapy. Rühling A; Wulf J; Schwahn C; Kocher T J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Apr; 31(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 15016258 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]