202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22144815)
1. In vitro evaluation of microleakage of class II packable composite resin restorations using flowable composite and resin modified glass ionomers as intermediate layers.
Majety KK; Pujar M
J Conserv Dent; 2011 Oct; 14(4):414-7. PubMed ID: 22144815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-and-rinse and self-etch dentin adhesive systems.
Kasraei S; Azarsina M; Majidi S
Oper Dent; 2011; 36(2):213-21. PubMed ID: 21702678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of flowable liner and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites.
Tredwin CJ; Stokes A; Moles DR
Oper Dent; 2005; 30(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 15765955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The effect of three lining materials on microleakage of packable composite resin restorations in young premolars with cavity margins located on enamel and dentin/cementum - An
Rizk HM; Al-Ruthea M; Habibullah MA
Int J Health Sci (Qassim); 2018; 12(6):8-17. PubMed ID: 30534038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Cavities using Packable Composite Restorations with and without use of Liners.
Arora R; Kapur R; Sibal N; Juneja S
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2012 Sep; 5(3):178-84. PubMed ID: 25206164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners.
Leevailoj C; Cochran MA; Matis BA; Moore BK; Platt JA
Oper Dent; 2001; 26(3):302-7. PubMed ID: 11357574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Marginal sealing ability of silorane and methacrylate resin composites in class II cavities: A scanning electron microscopic study.
Nanjundasetty JK; Nanda S; Panuganti V; Marigowda JC
J Conserv Dent; 2013 Nov; 16(6):503-8. PubMed ID: 24347882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effect of flowable composite lining on microleakage and internal voids in Class II composite restorations.
Korkmaz Y; Ozel E; Attar N
J Adhes Dent; 2007 Apr; 9(2):189-94. PubMed ID: 17489480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The marginal seal of Class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer.
Payne JH
J Clin Pediatr Dent; 1999; 23(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 10204453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of gingival microleakage of class II resin composite restorations with fiber inserts: An in vitro study.
Basavanna R; Garg A; Kapur R
J Conserv Dent; 2012 Apr; 15(2):166-9. PubMed ID: 22557817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effect of fiber placement or flowable resin lining on microleakage in Class II adhesive restorations.
Belli S; Orucoglu H; Yildirim C; Eskitascioglu G
J Adhes Dent; 2007 Apr; 9(2):175-81. PubMed ID: 17489478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement.
Xie H; Zhang F; Wu Y; Chen C; Liu W
Aust Dent J; 2008 Dec; 53(4):325-31. PubMed ID: 19133948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of different placement techniques on marginal microleakage of deep class-II cavities restored with two composite resin formulations.
M R; Sajjan GS; B N K; Mittal N
J Conserv Dent; 2010 Jan; 13(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 20582213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies.
Aggarwal V; Singla M; Yadav S; Yadav H
J Dent; 2014 May; 42(5):619-25. PubMed ID: 24631232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Microleakage of Class II packable resin composites lined with flowables: an in vitro study.
Neme AM; Maxson BB; Pink FE; Aksu MN
Oper Dent; 2002; 27(6):600-5. PubMed ID: 12413226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage between Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer, Flowable Composite, and Cention-N in Class V Restorations: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope Study.
Venugopal K; Krishnaprasad L; V P PS; Ravi AB; Haridas K; Soman D
J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2021 Jun; 13(Suppl 1):S132-S136. PubMed ID: 34447061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The effect of an intermediate layer of flowable composite resin on microleakage in packable composite restorations.
Ziskind D; Adell I; Teperovich E; Peretz B
Int J Paediatr Dent; 2005 Sep; 15(5):349-54. PubMed ID: 16128999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effectiveness of flowable resin composite in reducing microleakage - an in vitro study.
Lokhande NA; Padmai AS; Rathore VP; Shingane S; Jayashankar DN; Sharma U
J Int Oral Health; 2014 Jun; 6(3):111-4. PubMed ID: 25083045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The effect of flowable materials on the microleakage of Class II composite restorations that extend apical to the cemento-enamel junction.
Sadeghi M; Lynch CD
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(3):306-11. PubMed ID: 19544820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparative evaluation of different periods of enamel microabrasion on the microleakage of class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations: An
Bansal D; Mahajan M
Indian J Dent Res; 2017; 28(6):675-680. PubMed ID: 29256469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
