93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10650367)
1. One-year clinical evaluation of SureFil packable composite.
Perry R; Kugel G; Leinfelder K
Compend Contin Educ Dent; 1999 Jun; 20(6):544-50, 552-3. PubMed ID: 10650367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Two-year clinical evaluation of a high-density posterior restorative material.
Perry RD; Kugel G
Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2000 Dec; 21(12):1067-72, 1074, 1076 passim; quiz 1080. PubMed ID: 11908382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for a period of 3 years.
Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
Quintessence Int; 2005 May; 36(5):365-72. PubMed ID: 15892534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical evaluation of polyacid-modified resin composite posterior restorations: one-year results.
Luo Y; Lo EC; Fang DT; Wei SH
Quintessence Int; 2000 Oct; 31(9):630-6. PubMed ID: 11203987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 2-year Clinical evaluation of sodium hypochlorite treatment in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: a pilot study.
Saboia Vde P; Almeida PC; Rittet AV; Swift EJ; Pimenta LA
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(5):530-5. PubMed ID: 17024939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A clinical evaluation of packable and microhybrid resin composite restorations: one-year report.
de Souza FB; Guimarães RP; Silva CH
Quintessence Int; 2005 Jan; 36(1):41-8. PubMed ID: 15709496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 3-Year clinical evaluation of posterior packable composite resin restorations.
Loguercio AD; Reis A; Hernandez PA; Macedo RP; Busato AL
J Oral Rehabil; 2006 Feb; 33(2):144-51. PubMed ID: 16457675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Two-year clinical evaluation of a packable resin-based composite.
Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
J Am Dent Assoc; 2003 Sep; 134(9):1205-12. PubMed ID: 14528992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
Coelho-de-Souza FH; Klein-Júnior CA; Camargo JC; Beskow T; Balestrin MD; Demarco FF
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth.
Gianordoli Neto R; Santiago SL; Mendonça JS; Passos VF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 May; 9(4):26-33. PubMed ID: 18473024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A two-year clinical evaluation of TPH for restoration of Class II carious lesions in permanent teeth.
Perry RD; Kugel G; Habib CM; McGarry P; Settembrini L
Gen Dent; 1997; 45(4):344-9. PubMed ID: 9515440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effect of adhesive and flowable composite on postoperative sensitivity: 2-week results.
Perdigão J; Anauate-Netto C; Carmo AR; Hodges JS; Cordeiro HJ; Lewgoy HR; Dutra-Corrêa M; Castilhos N; Amore R
Quintessence Int; 2004; 35(10):777-84. PubMed ID: 15553285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. One-year clinical evaluation of an ethanol-based and a solvent-free dentin adhesive.
Aw TC; Lepe X; Johnson GH; Mancl L
Am J Dent; 2004 Dec; 17(6):451-6. PubMed ID: 15724760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Clinical evaluation of a posterior resin composite: 3-year results.
Wendt SL; Leinfelder KF
Am J Dent; 1994 Aug; 7(4):207-11. PubMed ID: 7986437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The effect of different drying methods for single step adhesive systems on microleakage of tooth colored restorations.
Owens BM
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2003 Feb; 4(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 12595929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical evaluation of Dyract AP restorative in permanent molars: 2-year results.
Luo Y; Lo EC; Fang DT; Smales RJ; Wei SH
Am J Dent; 2002 Dec; 15(6):403-6. PubMed ID: 12691278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of microhybrid, packable and nanofilled resin composites in Class I restorations.
Sadeghi M; Lynch CD; Shahamat N
J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Jul; 37(7):532-7. PubMed ID: 20202097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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; 31(4):409-17. PubMed ID: 16924980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin-based composites for posterior restorations in permanent teeth: results at 12 months.
Yip KH; Poon BK; Chu FC; Poon EC; Kong FY; Smales RJ
J Am Dent Assoc; 2003 Dec; 134(12):1581-9. PubMed ID: 14719754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
