1064 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12877431)
1. Interfacial gaps following ceramic inlay cementation vs direct composites.
Iida K; Inokoshi S; Kurosaki N
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(4):445-52. PubMed ID: 12877431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of additional enamel etching and a flowable composite to the interfacial integrity of Class II adhesive composite restorations.
Belli S; Inokoshi S; Ozer F; Pereira PN; Ogata M; Tagami J
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):70-5. PubMed ID: 11203780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dentin bond strengths of two ceramic inlay systems after cementation with three different techniques and one bonding system.
Ozturk N; Aykent F
J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):275-81. PubMed ID: 12644803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The effect of a "resin coating" on the interfacial adaptation of composite inlays.
Jayasooriya PR; Pereira PN; Nikaido T; Burrow MF; Tagami J
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 12540115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dentin bond strength and marginal adaptation: direct composite resins vs ceramic inlays.
Frankenberger R; Sindel J; Krämer N; Petschelt A
Oper Dent; 1999; 24(3):147-55. PubMed ID: 10530276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Marginal quality of tooth-colored restorations in class II cavities after artificial aging.
Manhart J; Schmidt M; Chen HY; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(4):357-66. PubMed ID: 11504435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Influence of flowable liner and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites.
Tredwin CJ; Stokes A; Moles DR
Oper Dent; 2005; 30(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 15765955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of composite indirect restorations bonded to dentin treated with adhesive and low-viscosity composite.
de Andrade OS; de Goes MF; Montes MA
Dent Mater; 2007 Mar; 23(3):279-87. PubMed ID: 16546249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Marginal adaptation of heat-pressed glass-ceramic veneers to Class 3 composite restorations in vitro.
Christgau M; Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Edelmann K
Oper Dent; 1999; 24(4):233-44. PubMed ID: 10823069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Microleakage of ceramic inlays luted with different resin cements and dentin adhesives.
Uludag B; Ozturk O; Ozturk AN
J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Oct; 102(4):235-41. PubMed ID: 19782826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Correlation between microleakage and cement thickness in three Class II inlay ceramic systems.
Romão W; Miranda WG; Cesar PF; Braga RR
Oper Dent; 2004; 29(2):212-8. PubMed ID: 15088734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of flowable resin on bond strength and gap formation in Class I restorations.
Miguez PA; Pereira PN; Foxton RM; Walter R; Nunes MF; Swift EJ
Dent Mater; 2004 Nov; 20(9):839-45. PubMed ID: 15451239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. SEM and microleakage evaluation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations with or without the use of a light-curable coating material and of polishing.
Magni E; Zhang L; Hickel R; Bossù M; Polimeni A; Ferrari M
J Dent; 2008 Nov; 36(11):885-91. PubMed ID: 18757129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Microleakage of CAD-CAM porcelain restorations.
LoPresti JT; David S; Calamia JR
Am J Dent; 1996 Feb; 9(1):37-9. PubMed ID: 9002814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Chairside vs. labside ceramic inlays: effect of temporary restoration and adhesive luting on enamel cracks and marginal integrity.
Frankenberger R; Krämer N; Appelt A; Lohbauer U; Naumann M; Roggendorf MJ
Dent Mater; 2011 Sep; 27(9):892-8. PubMed ID: 21708404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Finishing and polishing of indirect composite and ceramic inlays in-vivo: occlusal surfaces.
Jung M; Wehlen O; Klimek J
Oper Dent; 2004; 29(2):131-41. PubMed ID: 15088723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Three-year evaluation of computer-machined ceramic inlays: influence of luting agent.
Zuellig-Singer R; Bryant RW
Quintessence Int; 1998 Sep; 29(9):573-82. PubMed ID: 9807141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Physical properties of dual-cured luting-agents correlated to early no interfacial-gap incidence with composite inlay restorations.
Irie M; Maruo Y; Nishigawa G; Suzuki K; Watts DC
Dent Mater; 2010 Jun; 26(6):608-15. PubMed ID: 20334906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of gap size and cement type on gingival microleakage in Class V resin composite inlays.
Browning WD; Safirstein J
Quintessence Int; 1997 Aug; 28(8):541-4. PubMed ID: 9477882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
