233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14528992)
1. Two-year clinical evaluation of a packable resin-based composite.
Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
J Am Dent Assoc; 2003 Sep; 134(9):1205-12. PubMed ID: 14528992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin-based composites for posterior restorations in permanent teeth: results at 12 months.
Yip KH; Poon BK; Chu FC; Poon EC; Kong FY; Smales RJ
J Am Dent Assoc; 2003 Dec; 134(12):1581-9. PubMed ID: 14719754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for a period of 3 years.
Türkün LS; Türkün M; Ozata F
Quintessence Int; 2005 May; 36(5):365-72. PubMed ID: 15892534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: results at 3.5 years.
Poon EC; Smales RJ; Yip KH
J Am Dent Assoc; 2005 Nov; 136(11):1533-40. PubMed ID: 16329416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Two-year clinical evaluation of packable and nanostructured resin-based composites placed with two techniques.
Monteiro PM; Manso MC; Gavinha S; Melo P
J Am Dent Assoc; 2010 Mar; 141(3):319-29. PubMed ID: 20194388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of microhybrid, packable and nanofilled resin composites in Class I restorations.
Sadeghi M; Lynch CD; Shahamat N
J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Jul; 37(7):532-7. PubMed ID: 20202097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique.
Baratieri LN; Ritter AV
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2001; 13(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 11831309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: a five-year follow-up.
Fagundes TC; Barata TJ; Carvalho CA; Franco EB; van Dijken JW; Navarro MF
J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Apr; 140(4):447-54. PubMed ID: 19339534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. One-year clinical evaluation of SureFil packable composite.
Perry R; Kugel G; Leinfelder K
Compend Contin Educ Dent; 1999 Jun; 20(6):544-50, 552-3. PubMed ID: 10650367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial of conventional and heavy flowable composites in class II restorations.
Rocha Gomes Torres C; Rêgo HM; Perote LC; Santos LF; Kamozaki MB; Gutierrez NC; Di Nicoló R; Borges AB
J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):793-9. PubMed ID: 24769385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of adhesive and flowable composite on postoperative sensitivity: 2-week results.
Perdigão J; Anauate-Netto C; Carmo AR; Hodges JS; Cordeiro HJ; Lewgoy HR; Dutra-Corrêa M; Castilhos N; Amore R
Quintessence Int; 2004; 35(10):777-84. PubMed ID: 15553285
[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. Noncarious class V lesions restored with a polyacid modified resin composite and a nanocomposite: a two-year clinical trial.
Türkün LS; Celik EU
J Adhes Dent; 2008 Oct; 10(5):399-405. PubMed ID: 19058687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A clinical evaluation of a giomer restorative system containing surface prereacted glass ionomer filler: results from a 13-year recall examination.
Gordan VV; Blaser PK; Watson RE; Mjör IA; McEdward DL; Sensi LG; Riley JL
J Am Dent Assoc; 2014 Oct; 145(10):1036-43. PubMed ID: 25270702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical evaluation of a self-etching and a one-bottle adhesive system at two years.
Türkün SL
J Dent; 2003 Nov; 31(8):527-34. PubMed ID: 14554069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Self-etching primer and resin-based restorative material: two-year clinical evaluation.
Gordan VV; Mjör IA; Vazquez O; Watson RE; Wilson N
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2002; 14(5):296-302. PubMed ID: 12405585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. One-year clinical evaluation of composite restorations in posterior teeth: effect of adhesive systems.
Sundfeld RH; Scatolin RS; Oliveira FG; Machado LS; Alexandre RS; Sundefeld ML
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(6):E1-8. PubMed ID: 22621163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.
Arhun N; Celik C; Yamanel K
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(4):397-404. PubMed ID: 20672723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
