These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
452 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15025658)
1. 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]
2. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions. Ermiş RB Quintessence Int; 2002; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Tooth-colored filling materials for the restoration of cervical lesions: a 24-month follow-up study. Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hinkel R Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):251-8. PubMed ID: 11203827 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. One-year clinical evaluation of two resin composites, two polymerization methods, and a resin-modified glass ionomer in non-carious cervical lesions. Koubi S; Raskin A; Bukiet F; Pignoly C; Toca E; Tassery H J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Nov; 7(5):42-53. PubMed ID: 17091139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Five-year double-blind randomized clinical evaluation of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a polyacid-modified resin in noncarious cervical lesions. Loguercio AD; Reis A; Barbosa AN; Roulet JF J Adhes Dent; 2003; 5(4):323-32. PubMed ID: 15008339 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 1-year clinical evaluation of Compoglass and Fuji II LC in cervical erosion/abfraction lesions. Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Gregory PN; Owens BM Am J Dent; 1999 Jun; 12(3):119-22. PubMed ID: 10649933 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical evaluation of hybrid ionomer restoratives in Class V abrasion lesions: two-year results. Abdalla AI; Alhadainy HA Quintessence Int; 1997 Apr; 28(4):255-8. PubMed ID: 10332375 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Two-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite and a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material. Brackett WW; Browning WD; Ross JA; Brackett MG Oper Dent; 2001; 26(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 11203770 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Retention of a resin-modified glass ionomer adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. A 6-year follow-up. van Dijken JW J Dent; 2005 Aug; 33(7):541-7. PubMed ID: 16005793 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Two-year clinical performance of Class V resin-modified glass-lonomer and resin composite restorations. Brackett WW; Dib A; Brackett MG; Reyes AA; Estrada BE Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):477-81. PubMed ID: 14531590 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of glass ionomers and compomers in Class V carious lesions. Abdalla AI; Alhadainy HA; García-Godoy F Am J Dent; 1997 Feb; 10(1):18-20. PubMed ID: 9545915 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of esthetic parameters of resin-modified glass-ionomer materials and a polyacid-modified resin composite in Class V cervical lesions. Gladys S; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G Quintessence Int; 1999 Sep; 30(9):607-14. PubMed ID: 10765866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 5-year clinical performance of resin composite versus resin modified glass ionomer restorative system in non-carious cervical lesions. Franco EB; Benetti AR; Ishikiriama SK; Santiago SL; Lauris JR; Jorge MF; Navarro MF Oper Dent; 2006; 31(4):403-8. PubMed ID: 16924979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Two-year clinical effectiveness of a resin-modified glass-ionomer adhesive. Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P; Vanherle G Am J Dent; 2003 Dec; 16(6):363-8. PubMed ID: 15002948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results. Mendonça JS; Neto RG; Santiago SL; Lauris JR; Navarro MF; de Carvalho RM J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical evaluation of direct esthetic restorations in cervical abrasion/erosion lesions: one-year results. Powell LV; Gordon GE; Johnson GH Quintessence Int; 1991 Sep; 22(9):687-92. PubMed ID: 1835107 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations. Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions. van Dijken JW; Pallesen U Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):915-22. PubMed ID: 18155288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]