These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2659636)
1. A five year study of the clinical performance of a posterior composite resin restorative material. Rowe AH J Dent; 1989; 17 Suppl 1():S6-9; discussion S26-8. PubMed ID: 2659636 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Survival rates and reasons for failure of posterior composite restorations in multicentre clinical trial. Letzel H J Dent; 1989; 17 Suppl 1():S10-7; discussion S26-8. PubMed ID: 2659634 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation. Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Five-year performance of high-copper content amalgam restorations in a multiclinical trial of a posterior composite. Wilson NH; Wastell DG; Norman RD J Dent; 1996 May; 24(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 8675791 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and two amalgams. Mair LH Quintessence Int; 1998 Aug; 29(8):483-90. PubMed ID: 9807127 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations. Johnson GH; Bales DJ; Gordon GE; Powell LV Quintessence Int; 1992 Oct; 23(10):705-11. PubMed ID: 1289954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations. Duncalf WV; Wilson NH Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Twelve-year survival of 2-surface composite resin and amalgam premolar restorations placed by dental students. Naghipur S; Pesun I; Nowakowski A; Kim A J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):336-9. PubMed ID: 27086110 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Factors relating to usage patterns of amalgam and resin composite for posterior restorations--a prospective analysis. Khalaf ME; Alomari QD; Omar R J Dent; 2014 Jul; 42(7):785-92. PubMed ID: 24769386 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Despite all--do we have an appropriate substitute for amalgam?]. Levin L; Samorodnitzky-Naveh G; Coval M; Geiger SB Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993); 2008 Apr; 25(2):23-6, 73. PubMed ID: 18780542 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical evaluation of a composite resin system with a dentin bonding agent for restoration of permanent posterior teeth: a 3-year study. Roberts MW; Folio J; Moffa JP; Guckes AD J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Mar; 67(3):301-6. PubMed ID: 1507089 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Wear patterns in two amalgams and three posterior composites after 5 years' clinical service. Mair LH J Dent; 1995 Apr; 23(2):107-12. PubMed ID: 7738266 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. In vivo occlusal wear of posterior composite restorations. Lewis G Oper Dent; 1991; 16(2):61-9. PubMed ID: 1803330 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Occlusal glass ionomer cermet, resin sandwich and amalgam restorations: a 2-year clinical study. Lidums A; Wilkie R; Smales R Am J Dent; 1993 Aug; 6(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 7803005 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results. Rasmusson CG; Lundin SA Swed Dent J; 1995; 19(5):173-82. PubMed ID: 8614898 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Using composite resin as a posterior restorative material. Leinfelder KF J Am Dent Assoc; 1991 Apr; 122(4):65-70. PubMed ID: 2022790 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation. Palotie U; Eronen AK; Vehkalahti K; Vehkalahti MM J Dent; 2017 Jul; 62():13-17. PubMed ID: 28529175 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Performance of occlusin in butt-joint and bevel-edged preparations: five-year results. 4. Wilson NH; Wilson MA; offtell DG; Smith GA Dent Mater; 1991 Apr; 7(2):92-8. PubMed ID: 1936647 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Trends in material choice for posterior restorations in an Israeli dental school: composite resin versus amalgam. Ben-Gal G; Weiss EI J Dent Educ; 2011 Dec; 75(12):1590-5. PubMed ID: 22184598 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]