391 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18579283)
1. Split mouth randomized controlled clinical trial of beveled cavity preparations in primary molars: an 18-Month follow up.
Oliveira CA; Dias PF; Dos Santos MP; Maia LC
J Dent; 2008 Sep; 36(9):754-8. PubMed ID: 18579283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-month results.
Alves dos Santos MP; Luiz RR; Maia LC
J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):451-9. PubMed ID: 20188783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
Coelho-de-Souza FH; Klein-Júnior CA; Camargo JC; Beskow T; Balestrin MD; Demarco FF
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Survival of self-etch adhesive Class II composite restorations using ART and conventional cavity preparations in primary molars.
Eden E; Topaloglu-Ak A; Frencken JE; van't Hof M
Am J Dent; 2006 Dec; 19(6):359-63. PubMed ID: 17212078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A randomized trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 24-month results.
dos Santos MP; Passos M; Luiz RR; Maia LC
J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Feb; 140(2):156-66; quiz 247-8. PubMed ID: 19188412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the clinical behavior of resin modified glass ionomer cement on primary molars: a comparative one-year study.
Prabhakar AR; Raju OS; Kurthukoti AJ; Satish V
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Feb; 9(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 18264535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite.
Attin T; Opatowski A; Meyer C; Zingg-Meyer B; Buchalla W; Mönting JS
Am J Dent; 2001 Jun; 14(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 11572292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Clinical performance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with resin-based materials. 24-month results.
Cehreli ZC; Cetinguc A; Cengiz SB; Altay AN
Am J Dent; 2006 Oct; 19(5):262-6. PubMed ID: 17073200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical evaluation of glass-ionomer tunnel restorations in primary molars: 36 months results.
Markovic D; Peric T
Aust Dent J; 2008 Mar; 53(1):41-5. PubMed ID: 18304240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical evaluation of composite resin tunnel restorations on primary molars.
de Freitas AR; de Andrada MA; Baratieri LN; Monteiro Júnior S; de Sousa CN
Quintessence Int; 1994 Jun; 25(6):419-24. PubMed ID: 7938431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of conventional versus colored compomers for class II restorations in primary molars: a 12-month clinical study.
Ertugrul F; Cogulu D; Ozdemir Y; Ersin N
Med Princ Pract; 2010; 19(2):148-52. PubMed ID: 20134179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Partial caries removal and cariostatic materials in carious primary molar teeth: a randomised controlled clinical trial.
Foley J; Evans D; Blackwell A
Br Dent J; 2004 Dec; 197(11):697-701; discussion 689. PubMed ID: 15592552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of Class V composite restorations: three-year results.
Baratieri LN; Canabarro S; Lopes GC; Ritter AV
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(5):482-7. PubMed ID: 14531591
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Polymerization contraction stresses of resin-based composite restorations within beveled cavity preparations of Class I restorations.
Kinomoto Y; Torii M; Takeshige F; Ebisu S
Am J Dent; 2003 Apr; 16(2):139-43. PubMed ID: 12797575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study.
Kavvadia K; Kakaboura A; Vanderas AP; Papagiannoulis L
Pediatr Dent; 2004; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. One-year survival of occlusal ART restorations in primary molars placed with and without cavity conditioner.
Yassen G
J Dent Child (Chic); 2009; 76(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 19619427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite under different conditioning methods in primary teeth.
Turgut MD; Tekçiçek M; Olmez S
Oper Dent; 2004; 29(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 15470873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical evaluation of different posterior resin composite materials: a 7-year report.
Türkün LS; Aktener BO; Ateş M
Quintessence Int; 2003 Jun; 34(6):418-26. PubMed ID: 12859086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of adhesive systems and bevel on enamel margin integrity in primary and permanent teeth.
Swanson TK; Feigal RJ; Tantbirojn D; Hodges JS
Pediatr Dent; 2008; 30(2):134-40. PubMed ID: 18481578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
