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.
4. 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]
5. 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]
9. Durability of resin composite restorations in high C-factor cavities: a 12-year follow-up. van Dijken JW J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):469-74. PubMed ID: 20193727 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Longevity of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth in Public Dental Health Service: a prospective 8 years follow up. Pallesen U; van Dijken JW; Halken J; Hallonsten AL; Höigaard R J Dent; 2013 Apr; 41(4):297-306. PubMed ID: 23228499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations. Wucher M; Grobler SR; Senekal PJ Am J Dent; 2002 Aug; 15(4):274-8. PubMed ID: 12572648 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Eighteen-month clinical evaluation of microhybrid, packable and nanofilled resin composites in Class I restorations. Sadeghi M; Lynch CD; Shahamat N J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Jul; 37(7):532-7. PubMed ID: 20202097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Manhart J; Chen H; Hamm G; Hickel R Oper Dent; 2004; 29(5):481-508. PubMed ID: 15470871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth. Huth KC; Manhart J; Selbertinger A; Paschos E; Kaaden C; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 15241910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Three-year clinical evaluation of a flowable and a hybrid resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions. Kubo S; Yokota H; Yokota H; Hayashi Y J Dent; 2010 Mar; 38(3):191-200. PubMed ID: 19840829 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Clinical evaluation of a highly wear resistant composite. Dickinson GL; Gerbo LR; Leinfelder KF Am J Dent; 1993 Apr; 6(2):85-7. PubMed ID: 8397989 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]