338 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22236770)
1. 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]
2. IPS Empress inlays luted with a self-adhesive resin cement after 1 year.
Taschner M; Frankenberger R; García-Godoy F; Rosenbusch S; Petschelt A; Krämer N
Am J Dent; 2009 Feb; 22(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 19281114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: five-year follow-up.
Santos MJ; Mondelli RF; Navarro MF; Francischone CE; Rubo JH; Santos GC
Oper Dent; 2013; 38(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 22856680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: two-year clinical follow up.
Coelho Santos MJ; Mondelli RF; Lauris JR; Navarro MF
Oper Dent; 2004; 29(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 15088722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
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. Microleakage of porcelain veneer restorations bonded to enamel and dentin with a new self-adhesive resin-based dental cement.
Ibarra G; Johnson GH; Geurtsen W; Vargas MA
Dent Mater; 2007 Feb; 23(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 16499961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Effect of mouth-motion fatigue and thermal cycling on the marginal accuracy of partial coverage restorations made of various dental materials.
Stappert CF; Chitmongkolsuk S; Silva NR; Att W; Strub JR
Dent Mater; 2008 Sep; 24(9):1248-57. PubMed ID: 18395785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of bond strength between leucite-based and lithium disilicate-based ceramics to dentin after cementation with conventional and self-adhesive resin agents.
Rigolin FJ; Miranda ME; Flório FM; Basting RT
Acta Odontol Latinoam; 2014; 27(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 25335361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of ceramic inlays in vitro.
Frankenberger R; Hehn J; Hajtó J; Krämer N; Naumann M; Koch A; Roggendorf MJ
Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Jan; 17(1):177-83. PubMed ID: 22358378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. IPS Empress onlays luted with two dual-cured resin cements for endodontically treated teeth: a 3-year clinical evaluation.
Atali PY; Cakmakcioglu O; Topbasi B; Turkmen C; Suslen O
Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(1):40-2. PubMed ID: 21210001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Microleakage of ceramic inlays luted with different resin cements and dentin adhesives.
Uludag B; Ozturk O; Ozturk AN
J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Oct; 102(4):235-41. PubMed ID: 19782826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Influence of tissue characteristics at margins on leakage of Class II indirect porcelain restorations.
Ferrari M; Mason PN; Fabianelli A; Cagidiaco MC; Kugel G; Davidson CL
Am J Dent; 1999 Jun; 12(3):134-42. PubMed ID: 10649936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
