393 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11203987)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.
Ermiş RB
Quintessence Int; 2002; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class III cavities: three-year results.
Demirci M; Ersev H; Uçok M
Oper Dent; 2002; 27(3):223-30. PubMed ID: 12022451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
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. Clinical performance and wear resistance of two compomers in posterior occlusal restorations of permanent teeth: six-year follow-up.
Lund RG; Sehn FP; Piva E; Detoni D; Moura FR; Cardoso PE; Demarco FF
Oper Dent; 2007; 32(2):118-23. PubMed ID: 17427819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations.
Wucher M; Grobler SR; Senekal PJ
Am J Dent; 2002 Aug; 15(4):274-8. PubMed ID: 12572648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up.
van Dijken JW
J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A clinical evaluation of a resin composite and a compomer in non-carious Class V lesions. A 3-year follow-up.
Pollington S; van Noort R
Am J Dent; 2008 Feb; 21(1):49-52. PubMed ID: 18435377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cervical compomer restorations: the role of cavity etching in a 48-month clinical evaluation.
Di Lenarda R; Cadenaro M; De Stefano Dorigo E
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):382-7. PubMed ID: 11203846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite.
Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Buchalla W; Mönting JS
Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 11572292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations.
Kiremitci A; Alpaslan T; Gurgan S
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 19192832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Tooth-colored filling materials for the restoration of cervical lesions: a 24-month follow-up study.
Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hinkel R
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):251-8. PubMed ID: 11203827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparative clinical evaluation of different treatment approaches using a microfilled resin composite and a compomer in Class III cavities: two-year results.
Demirci M; Yildiz E; Uysal O
Oper Dent; 2008; 33(1):7-14. PubMed ID: 18335727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Class II restorations with a polyacid-modified composite resin in primary molars placed in a dental practice: results of a two-year clinical evaluation.
Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Mönting JS
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):259-64. PubMed ID: 11203828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite under different conditioning methods in primary teeth.
Turgut MD; Tekçiçek M; Olmez S
Oper Dent; 2004; 29(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 15470873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
Pascon FM; Kantovitz KR; Caldo-Teixeira AS; Borges AF; Silva TN; Puppin-Rontani RM; Garcia-Godoy F
J Dent; 2006 Jul; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparative in vivo and in vitro investigation of interfacial bond variability.
Hannig M; Friedrichs C
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 11203774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
