375 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11692340)
1. A clinical study of adhesive amalgam in pediatric dental practice.
Cannon ML; Tylka JA; Sandrik J
Compend Contin Educ Dent; 1999 Apr; 20(4):331-4, 336, 338 passim; quiz 344. PubMed ID: 11692340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Review of bonded amalgam restorations, and assessment in a general practice over five years.
Smales RJ; Wetherell JD
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):374-81. PubMed ID: 11203845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation.
Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G
Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A clinical study of the "open sandwich" technique in pediatric dental practice.
Cannon ML
J Dent Child (Chic); 2003; 70(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 12762613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Three-and-a-half-year clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin in children.
Memarpour M; Mesbahi M; Shafıei F
J Dent Child (Chic); 2010; 77(2):92-8. PubMed ID: 20819404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Bond strength and clinical evaluation of a new dentinal bonding agent to amalgam and resin composite.
Olmez A; Ulusu T
Quintessence Int; 1995 Nov; 26(11):785-93. PubMed ID: 8628838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations.
Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA
Dent Mater; 2007 Jan; 23(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 16417916
[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. 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]
14. Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
Shi L; Wang X; Zhao Q; Zhang Y; Zhang L; Ren Y; Chen Z
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 20166406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Silver amalgam versus resin modified GIC class-II restorations in primary molars: twelve month clinical evaluation.
Dutta BN; Gauba K; Tewari A; Chawla HS
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2001 Sep; 19(3):118-22. PubMed ID: 11817797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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; 10(2):43-53. PubMed ID: 10865391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer.
Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
da Rosa Rodolpho PA; Cenci MS; Donassollo TA; Loguércio AD; Demarco FF
J Dent; 2006 Aug; 34(7):427-35. PubMed ID: 16314023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study.
Kavvadia K; Kakaboura A; Vanderas AP; Papagiannoulis L
Pediatr Dent; 2004; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 6-year results.
Busato AL; Loguercio AD; Reis A; Carrilho MR
Am J Dent; 2001 Oct; 14(5):304-8. PubMed ID: 11803995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
