386 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23454329)
1. Marginal quality of posterior microhybrid resin composite restorations applied using two polymerisation protocols: 5-year randomised split mouth trial.
Barabanti N; Gagliani M; Roulet JF; Testori T; Ozcan M; Cerutti A
J Dent; 2013 May; 41(5):436-42. PubMed ID: 23454329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical Performance of Posterior Microhybrid Resin Composite Restorations Applied Using Regular and High-Power Mode Polymerization Protocols According to USPHS and SQUACE Criteria: 10-Year Randomized Controlled Split-Mouth Trial.
Cerutti A; Barabanti N; Özcan M
J Adhes Dent; 2020; 22(4):343-351. PubMed ID: 32666060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Selective enamel etching: effect on marginal adaptation of self-etch LED-cured bond systems in aged Class I composite restorations.
Souza-Junior EJ; Prieto LT; Araújo CT; Paulillo LA
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(2):195-204. PubMed ID: 22313271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of chlorhexidine digluconate on the clinical performance of adhesive restorations: a 3-year follow-up.
Sartori N; Stolf SC; Silva SB; Lopes GC; Carrilho M
J Dent; 2013 Dec; 41(12):1188-95. PubMed ID: 24076103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations.
Kiremitci A; Alpaslan T; Gurgan S
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 19192832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.
Arhun N; Celik C; Yamanel K
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(4):397-404. PubMed ID: 20672723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Marginal Quality of Class II Composite Restorations Placed in Bulk Compared to an Incremental Technique: Evaluation with SEM and Stereomicroscope.
Heintze SD; Monreal D; Peschke A
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Apr; 17(2):147-54. PubMed ID: 25893223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
Coelho-de-Souza FH; Klein-Júnior CA; Camargo JC; Beskow T; Balestrin MD; Demarco FF
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical evaluation of composite and compomer restorations in primary teeth: 24-month results.
Pascon FM; Kantovitz KR; Caldo-Teixeira AS; Borges AF; Silva TN; Puppin-Rontani RM; Garcia-Godoy F
J Dent; 2006 Jul; 34(6):381-8. PubMed ID: 16242232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Clinical evaluation of a low-shrinkage composite in posterior restorations: one-year results.
Baracco B; Perdigão J; Cabrera E; Giráldez I; Ceballos L
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(2):117-29. PubMed ID: 22313275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Two-year clinical performance of self-etching adhesive systems in composite restorations of anterior teeth.
Barcellos DC; Batista GR; Silva MA; Pleffken PR; Rangel PM; Fernandes VV; Di Nicoló R; Torres CR
Oper Dent; 2013; 38(3):258-66. PubMed ID: 23110580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Repair of dimethacrylate-based composite restorations by a silorane-based composite: a one-year randomized clinical trial.
Popoff DA; Santa Rosa TT; Ferreira RC; Magalhães CS; Moreira AN; Mjör IA
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(5):E1-10. PubMed ID: 22616930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A 7-year randomized prospective study of a one-step self-etching adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. The effect of curing modes and restorative material.
van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
J Dent; 2012 Dec; 40(12):1060-7. PubMed ID: 22955004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical evaluation of the soft-start (pulse-delay) polymerization technique in Class I and II composite restorations.
Chan DC; Browning WD; Frazier KB; Brackett MG
Oper Dent; 2008; 33(3):265-71. PubMed ID: 18505216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A new universal simplified adhesive: 6-month clinical evaluation.
Mena-Serrano A; Kose C; De Paula EA; Tay LY; Reis A; Loguercio AD; Perdigão J
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2013 Feb; 25(1):55-69. PubMed ID: 23374411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 36-month clinical evaluation of two adhesives and microhybrid resin composites in Class I restorations.
Swift EJ; Ritter AV; Heymann HO; Sturdevant JR; Wilder AD
Am J Dent; 2008 Jun; 21(3):148-52. PubMed ID: 18686764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. One-year Clinical Evaluation of Resin Composite Restorations of Noncarious Cervical Lesions in Smokers.
de Carvalho LD; Gondo R; Lopes GC
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug; 17(5):405-11. PubMed ID: 26525004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
