163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20157666)
1. Two-year clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive luting agent for ceramic inlays.
Peumans M; De Munck J; Van Landuyt K; Poitevin A; Lambrechts P; Van Meerbeek B
J Adhes Dent; 2010 Apr; 12(2):151-61. PubMed ID: 20157666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Four-year clinical evaluation of a self-adhesive luting agent for ceramic inlays.
Peumans M; Voet M; De Munck J; Van Landuyt K; Van Ende A; Van Meerbeek B
Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Apr; 17(3):739-50. PubMed ID: 22707232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays luted with self-adhesive resin cement: a 2-year in vivo study.
Taschner M; Krämer N; Lohbauer U; Pelka M; Breschi L; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
Dent Mater; 2012 May; 28(5):535-40. PubMed ID: 22236770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. IPS Empress inlays and onlays after four years--a clinical study.
Krämer N; Frankenberger R; Pelka M; Petschelt A
J Dent; 1999 Jul; 27(5):325-31. PubMed ID: 10377606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Indirect Resin Composite Inlays Cemented with a Self-adhesive, Self-etch or a Conventional Resin Cement Luting Agent: A 5 Years Prospective Clinical Evaluation.
Eltoukhy RI; Elkaffas AA; Ali AI; Mahmoud SH
J Dent; 2021 Sep; 112():103740. PubMed ID: 34233204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Controlled, prospective, randomized, clinical evaluation of partial ceramic crowns inserted with RelyX Unicem with or without selective enamel etching. Results after 2 years.
Schenke F; Federlin M; Hiller KA; Moder D; Schmalz G
Clin Oral Investig; 2012 Apr; 16(2):451-61. PubMed ID: 21431338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after six years: clinical behavior.
Frankenberger R; Petschelt A; Krämer N
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):459-65. PubMed ID: 11203857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Chairside vs. labside ceramic inlays: effect of temporary restoration and adhesive luting on enamel cracks and marginal integrity.
Frankenberger R; Krämer N; Appelt A; Lohbauer U; Naumann M; Roggendorf MJ
Dent Mater; 2011 Sep; 27(9):892-8. PubMed ID: 21708404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Luting of ceramic inlays in vitro: marginal quality of self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesives versus self-etch cements.
Frankenberger R; Lohbauer U; Schaible RB; Nikolaenko SA; Naumann M
Dent Mater; 2008 Feb; 24(2):185-91. PubMed ID: 17544101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ceramic inlays bonded with two adhesives after 4 years.
Krämer N; Ebert J; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
Dent Mater; 2006 Jan; 22(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 16122784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Operator vs. material influence on clinical outcome of bonded ceramic inlays.
Frankenberger R; Reinelt C; Petschelt A; Krämer N
Dent Mater; 2009 Aug; 25(8):960-8. PubMed ID: 19344946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 1-Year clinical study of indirect resin composite restorations luted with a self-adhesive resin cement: effect of enamel etching.
Azevedo CG; De Goes MF; Ambrosano GM; Chan DC
Braz Dent J; 2012; 23(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 22666765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Microleakage of IPS empress 2 inlay restorations luted with self-adhesive resin cements.
Cal E; Celik EU; Turkun M
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(4):417-24. PubMed ID: 22360365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Five-year clinical effectiveness of a two-step self-etching adhesive.
Peumans M; De Munck J; Van Landuyt K; Lambrechts P; Van Meerbeek B
J Adhes Dent; 2007 Feb; 9(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 17432395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A clinical trial of Empress II porcelain inlays luted to vital teeth with a dual-curing adhesive system and a self-curing resin cement.
Fabianelli A; Goracci C; Bertelli E; Davidson CL; Ferrari M
J Adhes Dent; 2006 Dec; 8(6):427-31. PubMed ID: 17243601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Four-year clinical performance and marginal analysis of pressed glass ceramic inlays luted with ormocer restorative vs. conventional luting composite.
Krämer N; Reinelt C; Richter G; Frankenberger R
J Dent; 2009 Nov; 37(11):813-9. PubMed ID: 19744761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Totally bonded ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years.
Krämer N; Taschner M; Lohbauer U; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
J Adhes Dent; 2008 Aug; 10(4):307-14. PubMed ID: 18792702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical performance of bonded leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years.
Krämer N; Frankenberger R
Dent Mater; 2005 Mar; 21(3):262-71. PubMed ID: 15705433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Marginal adaptation of three self-adhesive resin cements vs. a well-tried adhesive luting agent.
Behr M; Hansmann M; Rosentritt M; Handel G
Clin Oral Investig; 2009 Dec; 13(4):459-64. PubMed ID: 19225814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Fourteen years clinical evaluation of leucite-reinforced ceramic inlays luted using two different adhesion strategies.
Taschner M; Stirnweiss A; Frankenberger R; Kramer N; Galler KM; Maier E
J Dent; 2022 Aug; 123():104210. PubMed ID: 35760206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
