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.
604 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24561041)
1. Marginal adaptation of class II cavities restored with bulk-fill composites. Campos EA; Ardu S; Lefever D; Jassé FF; Bortolotto T; Krejci I J Dent; 2014 May; 42(5):575-81. PubMed ID: 24561041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations. Stavridakis MM; Kakaboura AI; Ardu S; Krejci I Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 17910230 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of bulk/incremental fill on internal gap formation of bulk-fill composites. Furness A; Tadros MY; Looney SW; Rueggeberg FA J Dent; 2014 Apr; 42(4):439-49. PubMed ID: 24480086 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Marginal Integrity of Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Class II Composite Restorations. Al-Harbi F; Kaisarly D; Bader D; El Gezawi M Oper Dent; 2016; 41(2):146-56. PubMed ID: 26266653 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Resin composites: Modulus of elasticity and marginal quality. Benetti AR; Peutzfeldt A; Lussi A; Flury S J Dent; 2014 Sep; 42(9):1185-92. PubMed ID: 25019363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Marginal adaptation of an etch-and-rinse adhesive with a new type of solvent in class II cavities after artificial aging. Manhart J; Trumm C Clin Oral Investig; 2010 Dec; 14(6):699-705. PubMed ID: 19937075 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Marginal Gap Formation in Approximal "Bulk Fill" Resin Composite Restorations After Artificial Ageing. Peutzfeldt A; Mühlebach S; Lussi A; Flury S Oper Dent; 2018; 43(2):180-189. PubMed ID: 29148914 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An in-vitro assessment of the shear bond strength of bulk-fill resin composites to permanent and deciduous teeth. Ilie N; Schöner C; Bücher K; Hickel R J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):850-5. PubMed ID: 24704081 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Flowable materials as an intermediate layer could improve the marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations in Class-V-cavities. Li Q; Jepsen S; Albers HK; Eberhard J Dent Mater; 2006 Mar; 22(3):250-7. PubMed ID: 16084584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of Polymerization Shrinkage, Physical Properties, and Marginal Adaptation of Flowable and Restorative Bulk Fill Resin-Based Composites. Jung JH; Park SH Oper Dent; 2017; 42(4):375-386. PubMed ID: 28402737 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Effect of eugenol-containing sealer on marginal adaptation of dentine-bonded resin fillings. Peters O; Göhring TN; Lutz F Int Endod J; 2000 Jan; 33(1):53-9. PubMed ID: 11307474 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of resin composite inlays in vitro. Roggendorf MJ; Krämer N; Dippold C; Vosen VE; Naumann M; Jablonski-Momeni A; Frankenberger R J Dent; 2012 Dec; 40(12):1068-73. PubMed ID: 22960537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. In Vitro Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation of Direct Class II Composite Restorations Made of Different "Low-Shrinkage" Systems. Shahidi C; Krejci I; Dietschi D Oper Dent; 2017; 42(3):273-283. PubMed ID: 28467259 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effect of cyclic loading on marginal adaptation and bond strength in direct vs. indirect class II MO composite restorations. Aggarwal V; Logani A; Jain V; Shah N Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):587-92. PubMed ID: 18833866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Determination of polymerization shrinkage of different composites using a photoelastic method. Rullman I; Patyna M; Janssen B; Willershausen B Am J Dent; 2017 Feb; 30(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 29178709 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Nanohybrid composite vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: clinical and microscopic results after 2 years. Krämer N; Reinelt C; García-Godoy F; Taschner M; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R Am J Dent; 2009 Aug; 22(4):228-34. PubMed ID: 19824560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of pre-heated composites and flowable liners on Class II gingival margin gap formation. Sabatini C; Blunck U; Denehy G; Munoz C Oper Dent; 2010; 35(6):663-71. PubMed ID: 21180006 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]