327 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26525008)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Clinical evaluation of the posterior composite Quixfil in class I and II cavities: 4-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.
Manhart J; Chen HY; Hickel R
J Adhes Dent; 2010 Jun; 12(3):237-43. PubMed ID: 20157663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical performance and SEM marginal quality of extended posterior resin composite restorations after 12 years.
Frankenberger R; Reinelt C; Glatthöfer C; Krämer N
Dent Mater; 2020 Jul; 36(7):e217-e228. PubMed ID: 32451207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: clinical results and margin analysis after four years.
Krämer N; Reinelt C; Richter G; Petschelt A; Frankenberger R
Dent Mater; 2009 Jun; 25(6):750-9. PubMed ID: 19237189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Four-year evaluation of a resin composite including nanofillers in posterior cavities.
Schirrmeister JF; Huber K; Hellwig E; Hahn P
J Adhes Dent; 2009 Oct; 11(5):399-404. PubMed ID: 19841767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended Class II cavities after six years.
Krämer N; García-Godoy F; Reinelt C; Feilzer AJ; Frankenberger R
Dent Mater; 2011 May; 27(5):455-64. PubMed ID: 21397316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. A randomized controlled 27 years follow up of three resin composites in Class II restorations.
Pallesen U; van Dijken JW
J Dent; 2015 Dec; 43(12):1547-58. PubMed ID: 26363442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial of conventional and heavy flowable composites in class II restorations.
Rocha Gomes Torres C; Rêgo HM; Perote LC; Santos LF; Kamozaki MB; Gutierrez NC; Di Nicoló R; Borges AB
J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):793-9. PubMed ID: 24769385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
Shi L; Wang X; Zhao Q; Zhang Y; Zhang L; Ren Y; Chen Z
Oper Dent; 2010; 35(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 20166406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Durability of new restorative materials in Class III cavities.
van Dijken JW
J Adhes Dent; 2001; 3(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 11317385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: 8-year results.
Frankenberger R; Reinelt C; Krämer N
Clin Oral Investig; 2014 Jan; 18(1):125-37. PubMed ID: 23525859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique.
Baratieri LN; Ritter AV
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2001; 13(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 11831309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite.
Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P
Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Randomized 3-year clinical evaluation of Class I and II posterior resin restorations placed with a bulk-fill resin composite and a one-step self-etching adhesive.
van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Feb; 17(1):81-8. PubMed ID: 25625133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical Performance and Epidemiologic Aspects of Fractured Anterior Teeth Restored with a Composite Resin: A Two-Year Clinical Study.
Vural UK; Kiremitçi A; Gökalp S
J Prosthodont; 2019 Jan; 28(1):e204-e209. PubMed ID: 28960769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Class I restoration margin quality in direct resin composites: A double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.
Femiano F; Femiano L; Femiano R; Lanza A; Lanza M; Rullo R; Perillo L
Am J Dent; 2015 Jun; 28(3):157-60. PubMed ID: 26201227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Five-year clinical effectiveness of a two-step self-etching adhesive.
Peumans M; De Munck J; Van Landuyt K; Lambrechts P; Van Meerbeek B
J Adhes Dent; 2007 Feb; 9(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 17432395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
