126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26538910)
1. Evaluation of sealing ability two self-etching adhesive systems and a glass ionomer lining LC under composite restoration in primary tooth: An in vitro study.
Pragasam AX; Duraisamy V; Nayak UA; Reddy V; Rao AP
J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2015 Aug; 7(Suppl 2):S518-23. PubMed ID: 26538910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Microleakage and shear punch bond strength in class II primary molars cavities restored with low shrink silorane based versus methacrylate based composite using three different techniques.
Fahmy AE; Farrag NM
J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2010; 35(2):173-81. PubMed ID: 21417120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative evaluation of different periods of enamel microabrasion on the microleakage of class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations: An
Bansal D; Mahajan M
Indian J Dent Res; 2017; 28(6):675-680. PubMed ID: 29256469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement.
Xie H; Zhang F; Wu Y; Chen C; Liu W
Aust Dent J; 2008 Dec; 53(4):325-31. PubMed ID: 19133948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Marginal microleakage of resin-modified glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations: effect of using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives.
Khoroushi M; Karvandi TM; Kamali B; Mazaheri H
Indian J Dent Res; 2012; 23(3):378-83. PubMed ID: 23059577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-and-rinse and self-etch dentin adhesive systems.
Kasraei S; Azarsina M; Majidi S
Oper Dent; 2011; 36(2):213-21. PubMed ID: 21702678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effect of various surface protections on the margin microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer cements.
Chuang SF; Jin YT; Tsai PF; Wong TY
J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Sep; 86(3):309-14. PubMed ID: 11552169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Microleakage after thermocycling of 4 etch and rinse and 3 self-etch adhesives with and without a flowable composite lining.
Guéders AM; Charpentier JF; Albert AI; Geerts SO
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(4):450-5. PubMed ID: 16924985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of a carbomer/fluoroapatite-enhanced glass-ionomer cement on primary teeth restorations.
Tolidis K; Boutsiouki C; Gerasimou P
Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2016 Sep; 17(3):227-233. PubMed ID: 27759413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effects of dentin adhesives and liner materials on the microleakage of class II resin composite restorations in primary and permanent teeth.
Güngör HC; Canoğlu E; Cehreli ZC
J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2014; 38(3):223-8. PubMed ID: 25095316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Marginal leakage of combinations of glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations.
Sarne S; Mante MO; Mante FK
J Clin Dent; 1996; 7(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 9238879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Microleakage of class V resin composites using various self-etching adhesives: an in vitro study.
Chandra PV; Harikumar V; Ramkiran D; Krishna MJ; Gouda MV
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jan; 14(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 23579893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of acid etching of glass ionomer cement surface on the microleakage of sandwich restorations.
Bona AD; Pinzetta C; Rosa V
J Appl Oral Sci; 2007 Jun; 15(3):230-4. PubMed ID: 19089135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive agents with dye under vacuum: an in vitro study.
Parolia A; Kundabala M; Gupta V; Verma M; Batra C; Shenoy R; Srikant N
Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(2):252-5. PubMed ID: 21891895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of Microleakage with Total Etch, Self Etch and Universal Adhesive Systems in Class V Restorations: An In vitro Study.
Gupta A; Tavane P; Gupta PK; Tejolatha B; Lakhani AA; Tiwari R; Kashyap S; Garg G
J Clin Diagn Res; 2017 Apr; 11(4):ZC53-ZC56. PubMed ID: 28571262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Micromechanical Intervention in Sandwich Restoration.
Khan TN; Ali Abidi SY; Nawaz Khan KB; Ahmed S; Rehman Qazi FU; Saeed N
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2015 Nov; 25(11):781-4. PubMed ID: 26577960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Microleakage on Class V glass ionomer restorations after cavity preparation with aluminum oxide air abrasion.
Corona SA; Borsatto MC; Rocha RA; Palma-Dibb RG
Braz Dent J; 2005; 16(1):35-8. PubMed ID: 16113931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations.
Toledano M; Osorio E; Osorio R; García-Godoy F
J Prosthet Dent; 1999 May; 81(5):610-5. PubMed ID: 10220667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
