188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26748965)
1. Effect of fiber reinforcement on microleakage of class II cavities restored with a novel G-aenial posterior composite, silorane composite, and nanohybrid composite: an in vitro comparative study.
Agrawal V; Kapoor S
J Investig Clin Dent; 2017 May; 8(2):. PubMed ID: 26748965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of silorane-based composite and nanohybrid composite with or without polyethylene fiber inserts in class II restorations: an in vitro study.
Agrawal VS; Parekh VV; Shah NC
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(5):E1-7. PubMed ID: 22616928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of fiber inserts, type of composite, and gingival margin location on the microleakage in Class II resin composite restorations.
Dhingra V; Taneja S; Kumar M; Kumari M
Oper Dent; 2014; 39(1):E9-15. PubMed ID: 23802641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Microleakage evaluation of Silorane-based composite and methacrylate-based composite in class II box preparations using two different layering techniques: an in vitro study.
Joseph A; Santhosh L; Hegde J; Panchajanya S; George R
Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(1):148. PubMed ID: 23852255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Gingival microleakage of Class II resin composite restorations with fiber inserts.
El-Mowafy O; El-Badrawy W; Eltanty A; Abbasi K; Habib N
Oper Dent; 2007; 32(3):298-305. PubMed ID: 17555183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparing microleakage and the layering methods of silorane-based resin composite in wide Class II MOD cavities.
Bagis YH; Baltacioglu IH; Kahyaogullari S
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(5):578-85. PubMed ID: 19830973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Er,Cr:YSGG Laser Handpieces for Class II Preparation and Microleakage of Silorane- or Methacrylate-Based Composite Restorations.
Ergin E; Oz FD; Gurgan S
Photomed Laser Surg; 2018 Sep; 36(9):499-505. PubMed ID: 30188252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Role of TiF4 in Microleakage of Silorane and Methacrylate-based Composite Resins in Class V Cavities.
Koohpeima F; Sharafeddin F; Jowkar Z; Ahmadzadeh S; Mokhtari MJ; Azarian B
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Mar; 17(3):240-7. PubMed ID: 27207205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Polymerization shrinkage of different types of composite resins and microleakage with and without liner in class II cavities.
Karaman E; Ozgunaltay G
Oper Dent; 2014; 39(3):325-31. PubMed ID: 24147747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Influence of flowable materials on microleakage of nanofilled and hybrid Class II composite restorations with LED and QTH LCUs.
Sadeghi M
Indian J Dent Res; 2009; 20(2):159-63. PubMed ID: 19553715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Gingival microleakage of class II bulk-fill composite resin restorations.
Behery H; El-Mowafy O; El-Badrawy W; Nabih S; Saleh B
Dent Med Probl; 2018; 55(4):383-388. PubMed ID: 30648363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Microleakage of repaired class V silorane and nano-hybrid composite restorations after preparation with erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser and diamond bur.
Yaman BC; Efes BG; Dörter C; Gömeç Y; Erdilek D; Yazıcıoğlu O
Lasers Med Sci; 2011 Mar; 26(2):163-70. PubMed ID: 20162317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of fiber nets, application techniques and flowable composites on microleakage and the effect of fiber nets on polymerization shrinkage in class II MOD cavities.
Ozel E; Soyman M
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(2):174-80. PubMed ID: 19363973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative evaluation of marginal adaptation and microleakage of low-shrinking composites after thermocycling and mechanical loading.
Hepdeniz OK; Ermis RB
Niger J Clin Pract; 2019 May; 22(5):633-641. PubMed ID: 31089017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Comparison of microleakage in Class II cavities restored with silorane-based and methacrylate-based composite resins using different restorative techniques over time.
Khosravi K; Mousavinasab SM; Samani MS
Dent Res J (Isfahan); 2015; 12(2):150-6. PubMed ID: 25878680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Influence of location of the gingival margin on the microleakage and internal voids of nanocomposites.
Ozel E; Korkmaz Y; Attar N
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Nov; 9(7):65-72. PubMed ID: 18997918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Microleakage of Class II restorations and microtensile bond strength to dentin of low-shrinkage composites.
Juloski J; Carrabba M; Aragoneses JM; Forner L; Vichi A; Ferrari M
Am J Dent; 2013 Oct; 26(5):271-7. PubMed ID: 24479279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with silorane-based or dimethacrylate-based composite resins.
Akbarian G; Ameri H; Chasteen JE; Ghavamnasiri M
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2014; 26(3):200-7. PubMed ID: 24103086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of Microleakage of Class V Cavities restored with the Embrace WetBond Class V Composite Resin and Conventional Opallis Composite Resin.
Tavangar M; Zohri Z; Sheikhnezhad H; Shahbeig S
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2017 Oct; 18(10):867-873. PubMed ID: 28989122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
