338 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22236770)
21. Clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays and onlays fabricated with two systems: 12-year follow-up.
Santos MJ; Freitas MC; Azevedo LM; Santos GC; Navarro MF; Francischone CE; Mondelli RF
Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Sep; 20(7):1683-90. PubMed ID: 26662120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Dentin bond strengths of two ceramic inlay systems after cementation with three different techniques and one bonding system.
Ozturk N; Aykent F
J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):275-81. PubMed ID: 12644803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Influence of cement shade and water storage on the final color of leucite-reinforced ceramics.
Karaagaclioglu L; Yilmaz B
Oper Dent; 2008; 33(4):386-91. PubMed ID: 18666495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic inlays after six years: wear of luting composites.
Krämer N; Frankenberger R
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):466-72. PubMed ID: 11203858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations.
Krämer N; Lohbauer U; Frankenberger R
Am J Dent; 2000 Nov; 13(Spec No):60D-76D. PubMed ID: 11763920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Long-term clinical results of chairside Cerec CAD/CAM inlays and onlays: a case series.
Otto T; Schneider D
Int J Prosthodont; 2008; 21(1):53-9. PubMed ID: 18350948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Quantification of all-ceramic crown margin surface profile from try-in to 1-week post-cementation.
Good ML; Mitchell CA; Pintado MR; Douglas WH
J Dent; 2009 Jan; 37(1):65-75. PubMed ID: 19013703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Luting glass ceramic restorations using a self-adhesive resin cement under different dentin conditions.
Guarda GB; Gonçalves LS; Correr AB; Moraes RR; Sinhoreti MA; Correr-Sobrinho L
J Appl Oral Sci; 2010; 18(3):244-8. PubMed ID: 20857001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Effect of Cements at Different Temperatures on the Clinical Performance and Marginal Adaptation of Inlay-Onlay Restorations In Vivo.
Aygün Emiroğlu Ş; Evren B; Kulak Özkan Y
J Prosthodont; 2016 Jun; 25(4):302-9. PubMed ID: 26215702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations.
Shor A; Nicholls JI; Phillips KM; Libman WJ
Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 12675458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Three-year clinical follow-up of posterior teeth restored with leucite-reinforced ips empress onlays and partial veneer crowns.
Murgueitio R; Bernal G
J Prosthodont; 2012 Jul; 21(5):340-5. PubMed ID: 22372380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Pressable feldspathic inlays in premolars: effect of cementation strategy and mechanical cycling on the adhesive bond between dentin and restoration.
Feitosa SA; Corazza PH; Cesar PF; Bottino MA; Valandro LF
J Adhes Dent; 2014 Apr; 16(2):147-54. PubMed ID: 24027771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Clinical long-term evaluation and failure characteristics of 1,335 all-ceramic restorations.
Beier US; Kapferer I; Dumfahrt H
Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(1):70-8. PubMed ID: 22259801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Eight-year clinical evaluation of fired ceramic inlays.
Hayashi M; Tsuchitani Y; Kawamura Y; Miura M; Takeshige F; Ebisu S
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(6):473-81. PubMed ID: 11203859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Midterm results of a 5-year prospective clinical investigation of extended ceramic veneers.
Guess PC; Stappert CF
Dent Mater; 2008 Jun; 24(6):804-13. PubMed ID: 18006051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Ceramic inlays and partial ceramic crowns: influence of remaining cusp wall thickness on the marginal integrity and enamel crack formation in vitro.
Krifka S; Anthofer T; Fritzsch M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G; Federlin M
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):32-42. PubMed ID: 19192835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
