188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26814320)
1. Influence of Cavity Margin Design and Restorative Material on Marginal Quality and Seal of Extended Class II Resin Composite Restorations In Vitro.
Soliman S; Preidl R; Karl S; Hofmann N; Krastl G; Klaiber B
J Adhes Dent; 2016; 18(1):7-16. PubMed ID: 26814320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Influence of different restorative techniques on marginal seal of class II composite restorations.
Rodrigues Junior SA; Pin LF; Machado G; Della Bona A; Demarco FF
J Appl Oral Sci; 2010; 18(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 20379680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Microleakage of silorane- and methacrylate-based class V composite restorations.
Krifka S; Federlin M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G
Clin Oral Investig; 2012 Aug; 16(4):1117-24. PubMed ID: 21947906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of curing methods and matrix type on the marginal seal of class II resin-based composite restorations in vitro.
Hofmann N; Hunecke A
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(1):97-105. PubMed ID: 16536200
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effectiveness of an infiltrant on sealing of composite restoration margins with/without artificial caries.
Tulunoglu O; Tulunoglu IF; Antonson SA; Campillo-Funollet M; Antonson D; Munoz-Viveros C
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2014 Nov; 15(6):717-25. PubMed ID: 25825096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Influence of curing methods and materials on the marginal seal of class V composite restorations in vitro.
Hofmann N; Siebrecht C; Hugo B; Klaiber B
Oper Dent; 2003; 28(2):160-7. PubMed ID: 12670072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Shrinkage kinetics of a methacrylate- and a silorane-based resin composite: effect on marginal integrity.
Gregor L; Bortolotto T; Feilzer AJ; Krejci I
J Adhes Dent; 2013 Jun; 15(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 23534010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations.
Stavridakis MM; Kakaboura AI; Ardu S; Krejci I
Oper Dent; 2007; 32(5):515-23. PubMed ID: 17910230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of gingival fluid on marginal adaptation of Class II resin-based composite restorations.
Spahr A; Schön F; Haller B
Am J Dent; 2000 Oct; 13(5):261-6. PubMed ID: 11764113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Resin composites: Modulus of elasticity and marginal quality.
Benetti AR; Peutzfeldt A; Lussi A; Flury S
J Dent; 2014 Sep; 42(9):1185-92. PubMed ID: 25019363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Selective enamel etching: effect on marginal adaptation of self-etch LED-cured bond systems in aged Class I composite restorations.
Souza-Junior EJ; Prieto LT; Araújo CT; Paulillo LA
Oper Dent; 2012; 37(2):195-204. PubMed ID: 22313271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Marginal Gap Formation in Approximal "Bulk Fill" Resin Composite Restorations After Artificial Ageing.
Peutzfeldt A; Mühlebach S; Lussi A; Flury S
Oper Dent; 2018; 43(2):180-189. PubMed ID: 29148914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in Class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine.
Dietrich T; Lösche AC; Lösche GM; Roulet JF
J Dent; 1999 Feb; 27(2):119-28. PubMed ID: 10071469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Effect of different monomer-based composites and acid etching pre-treatment of enamel on the microleakage using self-etch adhesives systems.
Catelan A; Giorgi MC; Soares GP; Lima DA; Marchi GM; Aguiar FH
Acta Odontol Scand; 2014 Nov; 72(8):651-5. PubMed ID: 24580091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of new generation surface sealants on the marginal permeability of Class V resin composite restorations.
Owens BM; Johnson WW
Oper Dent; 2006; 31(4):481-8. PubMed ID: 16924989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Marginal Quality of Class II Composite Restorations Placed in Bulk Compared to an Incremental Technique: Evaluation with SEM and Stereomicroscope.
Heintze SD; Monreal D; Peschke A
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Apr; 17(2):147-54. PubMed ID: 25893223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
