316 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12744410)
1. 3-year evaluation of a new open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.
Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Lindberg M
Am J Dent; 2003 Feb; 16(1):33-6. PubMed ID: 12744410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.
Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Lindberg M
J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):124-9. PubMed ID: 16956709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations.
van Dijken JW
Am J Dent; 1996 Oct; 9(5):195-8. PubMed ID: 9545903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years.
Andersson-Wenckert IE; van Dijken JW; Kieri C
Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 15241909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
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. Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up.
Chinelatti MA; Ramos RP; Chimello DT; Palma-Dibb RG
J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 31(3):251-7. PubMed ID: 15025658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical performance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with resin-based materials. 24-month results.
Cehreli ZC; Cetinguc A; Cengiz SB; Altay AN
Am J Dent; 2006 Oct; 19(5):262-6. PubMed ID: 17073200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in Class III cavities: 5-year results.
Demirci M; Ersev H; Sancakli HS; Topçubaşi M
Am J Dent; 2006 Oct; 19(5):293-6. PubMed ID: 17073207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. A 6-year clinical evaluation of Class I poly-acid modified resin composite/resin composite laminate restorations cured with a two-step curing technique.
van Dijken JW
Dent Mater; 2003 Jul; 19(5):423-8. PubMed ID: 12742438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Comparison of conventional versus colored compomers for class II restorations in primary molars: a 12-month clinical study.
Ertugrul F; Cogulu D; Ozdemir Y; Ersin N
Med Princ Pract; 2010; 19(2):148-52. PubMed ID: 20134179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interfacial adaptation of a Class II polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite laminate restoration in vivo.
Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Hörstedt P
Acta Odontol Scand; 2000 Apr; 58(2):77-84. PubMed ID: 10894429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
