155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2090809)
1. A 5-year study comparing a posterior composite resin and an amalgam.
Norman RD; Wright JS; Rydberg RJ; Felkner LL
J Prosthet Dent; 1990 Nov; 64(5):523-9. PubMed ID: 2090809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation.
Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G
Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical evaluation of a composite resin system with a dentin bonding agent for restoration of permanent posterior teeth: a 3-year study.
Roberts MW; Folio J; Moffa JP; Guckes AD
J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Mar; 67(3):301-6. PubMed ID: 1507089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results.
Neme AL; Evans DB; Maxson BB
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):512-9. PubMed ID: 11203864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The clinical performance of a posterior composite resin restorative material, Heliomolar R.O.: 3-year report.
Knibbs PJ; Smart ER
J Oral Rehabil; 1992 May; 19(3):231-7. PubMed ID: 1500966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations.
Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA
Dent Mater; 2007 Jan; 23(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 16417916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In vivo and in vitro evaluations of microleakage around Class I amalgam and composite restorations.
Alptekin T; Ozer F; Unlu N; Cobanoglu N; Blatz MB
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):641-8. PubMed ID: 21180003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Early failure of Class II resin composite versus Class II amalgam restorations placed by dental students.
Overton JD; Sullivan DJ
J Dent Educ; 2012 Mar; 76(3):338-40. PubMed ID: 22383602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner.
Chen RS; Liu CC; Cheng MR; Lin CP
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):411-7. PubMed ID: 11203849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Five-year performance of high-copper content amalgam restorations in a multiclinical trial of a posterior composite.
Wilson NH; Wastell DG; Norman RD
J Dent; 1996 May; 24(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 8675791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The performance of bonded vs. pin-retained complex amalgam restorations: a five-year clinical evaluation.
Summitt JB; Burgess JO; Berry TG; Robbins JW; Osborne JW; Haveman CW
J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 Jul; 132(7):923-31. PubMed ID: 11480646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Increasing the longevity of restorations by minimal intervention: a two-year clinical trial.
Moncada G; Fernández E; Martín J; Arancibia C; Mjör IA; Gordan VV
Oper Dent; 2008; 33(3):258-64. PubMed ID: 18505215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Retentive strength of an amalgam bonding agent: chemical vs light vs dual curing.
Winkler MM; Rhodes B; Moore BK
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):505-11. PubMed ID: 11203863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations: effect of thermal cycling.
Helvatjoglou-Antoniades M; Theodoridou-Pahini S; Papadogiannis Y; Karezis A
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):316-23. PubMed ID: 11203837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of occlusal marginal adaptation of Class II resin composite inlays.
Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Gruythuysen RJ
ASDC J Dent Child; 1994; 61(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 8182195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations.
Duncalf WV; Wilson NH
Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Amalgam repair: evaluation of bond strength and microleakage.
Ozer F; Unlü N; Oztürk B; Sengun A
Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):199-203. PubMed ID: 11931139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up.
Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M
J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Review of bonded amalgam restorations, and assessment in a general practice over five years.
Smales RJ; Wetherell JD
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):374-81. PubMed ID: 11203845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
