248 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14579884)
1. Potential of restorative systems with simplified adhesives: quantitative analysis of wear and marginal adaptation in vitro.
Göhring TN; Schönenberger KA; Lutz F
Am J Dent; 2003 Aug; 16(4):275-82. PubMed ID: 14579884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative in vivo and in vitro investigation of interfacial bond variability.
Hannig M; Friedrichs C
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 11203774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations.
Stavridakis MM; Kakaboura AI; Ardu S; Krejci I
Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 17910230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The effect of different drying methods for single step adhesive systems on microleakage of tooth colored restorations.
Owens BM
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2003 Feb; 4(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 12595929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of incorrect application of a water-based adhesive system on the marginal adaptation of Class V restorations.
Peschke A; Blunck U; Roulet JF
Am J Dent; 2000 Oct; 13(5):239-44. PubMed ID: 11764109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Flowable materials as an intermediate layer could improve the marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations in Class-V-cavities.
Li Q; Jepsen S; Albers HK; Eberhard J
Dent Mater; 2006 Mar; 22(3):250-7. PubMed ID: 16084584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Adaptation of Class II Vitremer restorations with and without primer: a morphometric study.
Gleicher H; Fuks AB; Sela J
Pediatr Dent; 1998; 20(4):263-6. PubMed ID: 9783297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. A comparison of the marginal and internal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in small to moderate-sized Class II preparations of conventional design.
Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
Quintessence Int; 2000 May; 31(5):347-52. PubMed ID: 11203946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Microleakage and polymerization shrinkage of various polymer restorative materials.
Gerdolle DA; Mortier E; Droz D
J Dent Child (Chic); 2008; 75(2):125-33. PubMed ID: 18647507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Support of undermined occlusal enamel provided by restorative materials.
Latino C; Troendle K; Summitt JB
Quintessence Int; 2001 Apr; 32(4):287-91. PubMed ID: 12066648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations.
Friedl KH; Schmalz G; Hiller KA; Mortazavi F
Oper Dent; 1997; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 9227124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Marginal adaptation of dentin bonded ceramic inlays: effects of bonding systems and luting resin composites.
Haller B; Hässner K; Moll K
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):574-84. PubMed ID: 14531604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Direct dentin bonding technique sensitivity when using air/suction drying steps.
Magne P; Mahallati R; Bazos P; So WS
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2008; 20(2):130-8; discussion 139-40. PubMed ID: 18380845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Marginal adaptation of inlay-retained adhesive fixed partial dentures after mechanical and thermal stress: an in vitro study.
Göehring TN; Peters OA; Lutz F
J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jul; 86(1):81-92. PubMed ID: 11458266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Nanohybrid composite vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: clinical and microscopic results after 2 years.
Krämer N; Reinelt C; García-Godoy F; Taschner M; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
Am J Dent; 2009 Aug; 22(4):228-34. PubMed ID: 19824560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Influence of solvent type in experimental dentin primer on the marginal adaptation of Class V restorations.
Balkenhol M; Huang J; Wöstmann B; Hannig M
J Dent; 2007 Nov; 35(11):836-44. PubMed ID: 17905507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations.
Krämer N; Lohbauer U; Frankenberger R
Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):60D-76D. PubMed ID: 11763920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
