846 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24769385)
21. Ten-year Clinical Performance of Posterior Resin Composite Restorations.
Krämer N; Reinelt C; Frankenberger R
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug; 17(5):433-41. PubMed ID: 26525008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. 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]
24. Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in Class I and Class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-month results.
Alves dos Santos MP; Luiz RR; Maia LC
J Dent; 2010 Jun; 38(6):451-9. PubMed ID: 20188783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 5-year clinical performance of resin composite versus resin modified glass ionomer restorative system in non-carious cervical lesions.
Franco EB; Benetti AR; Ishikiriama SK; Santiago SL; Lauris JR; Jorge MF; Navarro MF
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(4):403-8. PubMed ID: 16924979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner.
Efes BG; Dörter C; Gömeç Y; Koray F
J Adhes Dent; 2006 Apr; 8(2):119-26. PubMed ID: 16708724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner.
Ernst CP; Canbek K; Aksogan K; Willershausen B
Clin Oral Investig; 2003 Sep; 7(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 12898294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Randomized clinical trial of adhesive restorations in primary molars. 18-month results.
Casagrande L; Dalpian DM; Ardenghi TM; Zanatta FB; Balbinot CE; García-Godoy F; De Araujo FB
Am J Dent; 2013 Dec; 26(6):351-5. PubMed ID: 24640441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. One-year clinical performance of a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite restorative material in unprepared Class V restorations.
Brackett MG; Dib A; Brackett WW; Estrada BE; Reyes AA
Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 11931132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. One-year retrospective clinical evaluation of hybrid composite restorations placed in United Kingdom general practices.
Burke FJ; Crisp RJ; Bell TJ; Healy A; Mark B; McBirnie R; Osborne-Smith KL
Quintessence Int; 2001 Apr; 32(4):293-8. PubMed ID: 12066649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Tooth-colored filling materials for the restoration of cervical lesions: a 24-month follow-up study.
Folwaczny M; Loher C; Mehl A; Kunzelmann KH; Hinkel R
Oper Dent; 2000; 25(4):251-8. PubMed ID: 11203827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
35. Clinical evaluation of polyacid-modified resin composite posterior restorations: one-year results.
Luo Y; Lo EC; Fang DT; Wei SH
Quintessence Int; 2000 Oct; 31(9):630-6. PubMed ID: 11203987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.
Ermiş RB
Quintessence Int; 2002; 33(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 12165991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Clinical wear rate of direct and indirect posterior composite resin restorations.
Cetin AR; Unlu N
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2012 Jun; 32(3):e87-94. PubMed ID: 22408783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. 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]
40. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
da Rosa Rodolpho PA; Cenci MS; Donassollo TA; Loguércio AD; Demarco FF
J Dent; 2006 Aug; 34(7):427-35. PubMed ID: 16314023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
