304 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12878022)
1. Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth.
Van Nieuwenhuysen JP; D'Hoore W; Carvalho J; Qvist V
J Dent; 2003 Aug; 31(6):395-405. PubMed ID: 12878022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Twelve-year survival of 2-surface composite resin and amalgam premolar restorations placed by dental students.
Naghipur S; Pesun I; Nowakowski A; Kim A
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):336-9. PubMed ID: 27086110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation.
Palotie U; Eronen AK; Vehkalahti K; Vehkalahti MM
J Dent; 2017 Jul; 62():13-17. PubMed ID: 28529175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings.
Collins CJ; Bryant RW; Hodge KL
J Dent; 1998 May; 26(4):311-7. PubMed ID: 9611936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical longevity of extensive direct resin composite restorations after amalgam replacement with a mean follow-up of 15 years.
Hofsteenge JW; Scholtanus JD; Özcan M; Nolte IM; Cune MS; Gresnigt MMM
J Dent; 2023 Mar; 130():104409. PubMed ID: 36623686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quality and Survival of Direct Light-Activated Composite Resin Restorations in Posterior Teeth: A 5- to 20-Year Retrospective Longitudinal Study.
Borgia E; Baron R; Borgia JL
J Prosthodont; 2019 Jan; 28(1):e195-e203. PubMed ID: 28513897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Longevity of occlusally-stressed restorations in posterior primary teeth.
Hickel R; Kaaden C; Paschos E; Buerkle V; García-Godoy F; Manhart J
Am J Dent; 2005 Jun; 18(3):198-211. PubMed ID: 16158813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of different transitional restorations on the fracture resistance of premolar teeth.
Qualtrough AJ; Cawte SG; Wilson NH
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):267-72. PubMed ID: 11357569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Despite all--do we have an appropriate substitute for amalgam?].
Levin L; Samorodnitzky-Naveh G; Coval M; Geiger SB
Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993); 2008 Apr; 25(2):23-6, 73. PubMed ID: 18780542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Factors relating to usage patterns of amalgam and resin composite for posterior restorations--a prospective analysis.
Khalaf ME; Alomari QD; Omar R
J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):785-92. PubMed ID: 24769386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure.
Hickel R; Manhart J
J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):45-64. PubMed ID: 11317384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Selection of dental materials and longevity of replaced restorations in Public Dental Health clinics in northern Sweden.
Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K; van Dijken JW; Funegård U; Lindberg A; Nilsson M
J Dent; 2009 Sep; 37(9):673-8. PubMed ID: 19477572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial.
Bernardo M; Luis H; Martin MD; Leroux BG; Rue T; Leitão J; DeRouen TA
J Am Dent Assoc; 2007 Jun; 138(6):775-83. PubMed ID: 17545266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Long-term clinical evaluation of fracture and pulp injury following glass-ionomer cement or composite resin applied as a base filling in teeth restored with amalgam.
De C Luz MA; Ciaramicoli-Rodrigues MT; Garone Netto N; De Lima AC
J Oral Rehabil; 2001 Jul; 28(7):634-9. PubMed ID: 11422695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Eight-year study on conventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth.
Qvist V; Laurberg L; Poulsen A; Teglers PT
Acta Odontol Scand; 2004 Feb; 62(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 15124781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Five-year study of Class II restorations in permanent teeth using amalgam, glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cerment and resin-based composite materials.
Mjör IA; Jokstad A
J Dent; 1993 Dec; 21(6):338-43. PubMed ID: 8258583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A 15-year randomized controlled study of a reduced shrinkage stress resin composite.
van Dijken JW; Lindberg A
Dent Mater; 2015 Sep; 31(9):1150-8. PubMed ID: 26205382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Study regarding coronal fracture probability in posterior amalgam restorations].
Andrian S; Iovan G; Oncea C; Teodorovici P; Hasna M
Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi; 2006; 110(3):692-7. PubMed ID: 17571568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Longevity of posterior tooth dental restorations.
Christensen GJ
J Am Dent Assoc; 2005 Feb; 136(2):201-3. PubMed ID: 15782524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
