319 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25821368)
1. Retention of resin-based filled and unfilled pit and fissure sealants: A comparative clinical study.
Reddy VR; Chowdhary N; Mukunda KS; Kiran NK; Kavyarani BS; Pradeep MC
Contemp Clin Dent; 2015 Mar; 6(Suppl 1):S18-23. PubMed ID: 25821368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Retention of pit and fissure sealant versus flowable composite: An
Singh C; Kaur K; Kapoor K
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2019; 37(4):372-377. PubMed ID: 31710012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Clinical Evaluation of Retention of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Pit and Fissure Sealants in Permanent First Molars: An 18 Months Follow-up: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Gyati O; Jain M; Sogi S; Shahi P; Sharma P; Ramesh A
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2023; 16(2):350-356. PubMed ID: 37519987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative evaluation of Shear bond strength of different Pit and fissure Sealants in Primary and Permanent teeth - An In-Vitro Study.
Pushpalatha HM; Ravichandra KS; Srikanth K; Divya G; Done V; Krishna KB; Patil V
J Int Oral Health; 2014 Apr; 6(2):84-9. PubMed ID: 24876707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.
Ahovuo-Saloranta A; Hiiri A; Nordblad A; Worthington H; Mäkelä M
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2004; (3):CD001830. PubMed ID: 15266455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison and Clinical Evaluation of Two Pit and Fissure Sealants on Permanent Mandibular First Molars: An
Smitha M; Paul ST; Nagaraj T; Khan AR; Rinu K
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2019 Oct; 20(10):1151-1158. PubMed ID: 31883249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth.
Ahovuo-Saloranta A; Forss H; Walsh T; Hiiri A; Nordblad A; Mäkelä M; Worthington HV
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Mar; (3):CD001830. PubMed ID: 23543512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Retention of a resin-based sealant and a glass ionomer used as a fissure sealant: a comparative clinical study.
Subramaniam P; Konde S; Mandanna DK
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2008 Sep; 26(3):114-20. PubMed ID: 18923223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. One-year Clinical Evaluation of Retention Ability and Anticaries Effect of a Glass Ionomer-based and a Resin-based Fissure Sealant on Permanent First Molars: An
Mathew SR; Narayanan RK; Vadekkepurayil K; Puthiyapurayil J
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2019; 12(6):553-559. PubMed ID: 32440074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Retention and remineralization effect of moisture tolerant resin-based sealant and glass ionomer sealant on non-cavitated pit and fissure caries: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
Alsabek L; Al-Nerabieah Z; Bshara N; Comisi JC
J Dent; 2019 Jul; 86():69-74. PubMed ID: 31136817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparative Evaluation of Penetration Ability of Three Pit and Fissure Sealants and Their Relationship with Fissure Patterns.
Garg N; Indushekar KR; Saraf BG; Sheoran N; Sardana D
J Dent (Shiraz); 2018 Jun; 19(2):92-99. PubMed ID: 29854882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Twenty-four month clinical evaluation of fissure sealants on partially erupted permanent first molars: glass ionomer versus resin-based sealant.
Antonson SA; Antonson DE; Brener S; Crutchfield J; Larumbe J; Michaud C; Yazici AR; Hardigan PC; Alempour S; Evans D; Ocanto R
J Am Dent Assoc; 2012 Feb; 143(2):115-22. PubMed ID: 22298552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative Assessment of Retention and Caries Protective Effectiveness of a Hydrophilic and a Conventional Sealant-A Clinical Trial.
Beresescu L; Pacurar M; Vlasa A; Stoica AM; Dako T; Petcu B; Eșian D
Children (Basel); 2022 Apr; 9(5):. PubMed ID: 35626822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative Evaluation of Wear Strength and Compressive Strength of Two Pit and Fissure Sealants with a Nanofilled Resin Coating: An
Gunasekaran R; Sharmin D; Baghkomeh PN; Jaganathan G; Ravindran V
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2024 Jan; 17(1):31-35. PubMed ID: 38559869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparative Evaluation of Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Resin-based Sealants: A Clinical Study.
Mohanraj M; Prabhu R; Thomas E; Kumar S
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2019 Jul; 20(7):812-817. PubMed ID: 31597801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical comparison of a flowable composite and fissure sealant: a 24-month split-mouth, randomized, and controlled study.
Erdemir U; Sancakli HS; Yaman BC; Ozel S; Yucel T; Yıldız E
J Dent; 2014 Feb; 42(2):149-57. PubMed ID: 24296163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Glass Ionomer-based Sealant using ART Protocol and Resin-based Sealant on Primary Molars in Children.
Kaverikana K; Vojjala B; Subramaniam P
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2022; 15(6):724-728. PubMed ID: 36866139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical evaluation of a medium-filled flowable restorative material as a pit and fissure sealant.
Autio-Gold JT
Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):325-9. PubMed ID: 12120768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical Evaluation of the Retention of Self-adhering Flowable Composite as Fissure Sealant in 6-9-year-old Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Bhuvaneswari P; Vinay C; Uloopi KS; RojaRamya KS; Chandrasekhar R; Chaitanya P
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2022; 15(3):322-326. PubMed ID: 35991800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Penetration of Filled and Unfilled Resin Sealants on Different Enamel Substrates.
Kantovitz KR; Moreira KM; Pascon FM; Nociti FH; Machado Tabchoury CP; Puppin-Rontani RM
Pediatr Dent; 2016 Nov; 38(7):472-476. PubMed ID: 28281950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
