107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16904254)
1. The long-term effect of a composite resin restoration on proximal contact tightness.
Loomans BA; Opdam NJ; Roeters FJ; Bronkhorst EM; Plasschaert AJ
J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):104-8. PubMed ID: 16904254
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A randomized clinical trial of cusp-replacing resin composite restorations: efficiency and short-term effectiveness.
Kuijs RH; Fennis WM; Kreulen CM; Roeters FJ; Creugers NH; Burgersdijk RC
Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(4):349-54. PubMed ID: 16900817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of volumetric shrinkage and curing light intensity on proximal contact tightness of class II resin composite restorations: in vitro study.
El-Shamy H; Saber MH; Dörfer CE; El-Badrawy W; Loomans BA
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(2):205-10. PubMed ID: 22313267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical evaluation of proximal contacts of Class II esthetic direct restorations.
Prakki A; Cilli R; Saad JO; Rodrigues JR
Quintessence Int; 2004; 35(10):785-9. PubMed ID: 15553286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of composite resin consistency and placement technique on proximal contact tightness of Class II restorations.
Loomans BA; Opdam NJ; Roeters JF; Bronkhorst EM; Plasschaert AJ
J Adhes Dent; 2006 Oct; 8(5):305-10. PubMed ID: 17080878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of matrix systems on proximal contact tightness of 2- and 3-surface posterior composite restorations in vivo.
Wirsching E; Loomans BA; Klaiber B; Dörfer CE
J Dent; 2011 May; 39(5):386-90. PubMed ID: 21414384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The effectiveness of different polymerization protocols for class II composite resin restorations.
de Jong LC; Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JJ; Wolke JG; Geitenbeek B
J Dent; 2007 Jun; 35(6):513-20. PubMed ID: 17383067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A randomized clinical trial on proximal contacts of posterior composites.
Loomans BA; Opdam NJ; Roeters FJ; Bronkhorst EM; Burgersdijk RC; Dörfer CE
J Dent; 2006 Apr; 34(4):292-7. PubMed ID: 16157438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Morphological analysis of proximal contacts in class II direct restorations with 3D image reconstruction.
Chuang SF; Su KC; Wang CH; Chang CH
J Dent; 2011 Jun; 39(6):448-56. PubMed ID: 21504778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Class II composite restorations with metallic and translucent matrices: 2-year follow-up findings.
Demarco FF; Cenci MS; Lima FG; Donassollo TA; André Dde A; Leida FL
J Dent; 2007 Mar; 35(3):231-7. PubMed ID: 17034926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of proximal contacts of Class II resin composite restorations in vitro.
Loomans BA; Opdam NJ; Roeters FJ; Bronkhorst EM; Burgersdijk RC
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(6):688-93. PubMed ID: 17153978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of proximal contact tightness of Class II resin composite restorations.
Saber MH; Loomans BA; El Zohairy A; Dörfer CE; El-Badrawy W
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 20166409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 36-month clinical evaluation of two adhesives and microhybrid resin composites in Class I restorations.
Swift EJ; Ritter AV; Heymann HO; Sturdevant JR; Wilder AD
Am J Dent; 2008 Jun; 21(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 18686764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A prospective randomised clinical trial of one bis-GMA-based and two ormocer-based composite restorative systems in class II cavities: three-year results.
Bottenberg P; Alaerts M; Keulemans F
J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):163-71. PubMed ID: 16963171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Flowable resin composite as a class II restorative in primary molars: A two-year clinical evaluation.
Andersson-Wenckert I; Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K
Acta Odontol Scand; 2006 Nov; 64(6):334-40. PubMed ID: 17123909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities.
Lindberg A; van Dijken JW; Lindberg M
J Dent; 2007 Feb; 35(2):124-9. PubMed ID: 16956709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical long-term retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems in non-carious cervical lesions. A 13 years evaluation.
van Dijken JW; Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K; Lindberg A
Dent Mater; 2007 Sep; 23(9):1101-7. PubMed ID: 17113139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. One-year comparison of metallic and translucent matrices in Class II composite resin restorations.
Cenci MS; Demarco FF; Pereira CL; Lund RG; de Carvalho RM
Am J Dent; 2007 Feb; 20(1):41-5. PubMed ID: 17380807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. A clinical study on interdental separation techniques.
Loomans BA; Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters FJ; Dörfer CE
Oper Dent; 2007; 32(3):207-11. PubMed ID: 17555170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
