1962 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25544104)
41. 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]
42. Influence of the shape of the layers in photo-cured dental restorations on the shrinkage stress peaks-FEM study.
Kowalczyk P
Dent Mater; 2009 Dec; 25(12):e83-91. PubMed ID: 19786300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with extensive composite resin restorations.
Plotino G; Buono L; Grande NM; Lamorgese V; Somma F
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Mar; 99(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 18319094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Marginal integrity in minimally invasive molar resin composite restorations: Impact of polymerization shrinkage.
Weimann D; Fleck C; Razi H
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2024 Jul; 155():106554. PubMed ID: 38676971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Finite element analysis of bonded model Class I 'restorations' after shrinkage.
Rodrigues FP; Silikas N; Watts DC; Ballester RY
Dent Mater; 2012 Feb; 28(2):123-32. PubMed ID: 22036589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. An acoustic emission study on interfacial debonding in composite restorations.
Liu X; Li H; Li J; Lu P; Fok AS
Dent Mater; 2011 Sep; 27(9):934-41. PubMed ID: 21700327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Fracture resistance of class II preformed ceramic insert and direct composite resin restorations.
Görücü J
J Dent; 2003 Jan; 31(1):83-8. PubMed ID: 12615024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. The effect of dentin adhesive and cure mode on film thickness and microtensile bond strength to dentin in indirect restorations.
Coelho Santos MJ; Navarro MF; Tam L; McComb D
Oper Dent; 2005; 30(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 15765957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Effect of low-elastic modulus liner and base as stress-absorbing layer in composite resin restorations.
Oliveira LC; Duarte S; Araujo CA; Abrahão A
Dent Mater; 2010 Mar; 26(3):e159-69. PubMed ID: 20031198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Influence of customized composite resin fibreglass posts on the mechanics of restored treated teeth.
Anchieta RB; Rocha EP; Almeida EO; Freitas AC; Martin M; Martini AP; Archangelo CM; Ko CC
Int Endod J; 2012 Feb; 45(2):146-55. PubMed ID: 22070803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Cervical microleakage in MOD restorations: in vitro comparison of indirect and direct composite.
Duquia Rde C; Osinaga PW; Demarco FF; de V Habekost L; Conceição EN
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(6):682-7. PubMed ID: 17153977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Effect of restoration method on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
Yamada Y; Tsubota Y; Fukushima S
Int J Prosthodont; 2004; 17(1):94-8. PubMed ID: 15008239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Evaluation of micro-tensile bond strengths of composite materials in comparison to their polymerization shrinkage.
Ilie N; Kunzelmann KH; Hickel R
Dent Mater; 2006 Jul; 22(7):593-601. PubMed ID: 16289723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Residual shrinkage stress distributions in molars after composite restoration.
Versluis A; Tantbirojn D; Pintado MR; DeLong R; Douglas WH
Dent Mater; 2004 Jul; 20(6):554-64. PubMed ID: 15134943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. The effect of three variables on shear bond strength when luting a resin inlay to dentin.
Lee JI; Park SH
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(3):288-92. PubMed ID: 19544817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Interfacial gaps following ceramic inlay cementation vs direct composites.
Iida K; Inokoshi S; Kurosaki N
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(4):445-52. PubMed ID: 12877431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Preheated composite resin used as a luting agent for indirect restorations: effects on bond strength and resin-dentin interfaces.
Goulart M; Borges Veleda B; Damin D; Bovi Ambrosano GM; Coelho de Souza FH; Erhardt MCG
Int J Esthet Dent; 2018; 13(1):86-97. PubMed ID: 29379905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Luting of inlays, onlays, and overlays with preheated restorative composite resin does not prevent seating accuracy.
Magne P; Razaghy M; Carvalho MA; Soares LM
Int J Esthet Dent; 2018; 13(3):318-332. PubMed ID: 30073216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Effect of luting composite shrinkage and thermal loads on the stress distribution in porcelain laminate veneers.
Magne P; Versluis A; Douglas WH
J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Mar; 81(3):335-44. PubMed ID: 10050123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. 3D-finite element analyses of cusp movements in a human upper premolar, restored with adhesive resin-based composites.
Ausiello P; Apicella A; Davidson CL; Rengo S
J Biomech; 2001 Oct; 34(10):1269-77. PubMed ID: 11522306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
