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.
7. The material science of minimally invasive esthetic restorations. Nový BB; Fuller CE Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2008; 29(6):338-46; quiz 347. PubMed ID: 18795638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Randomized controlled clinical trial of the 24-months survival of composite resin restorations after one-step incomplete and complete excavation on primary teeth. Franzon R; Opdam NJ; Guimarães LF; Demarco FF; Casagrande L; Haas AN; Araujo FB J Dent; 2015 Oct; 43(10):1235-41. PubMed ID: 26231301 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Minimally Invasive Long-Term Management of Direct Restorations: the '5 Rs'. Green D; Mackenzie L; Banerjee A Dent Update; 2015 Jun; 42(5):413-6, 419-21, 423-6. PubMed ID: 26964443 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Direct placement restorative materials for use in posterior teeth: the current options. Lyons K; N Z Dent J; 2003 Mar; 99(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 15330384 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [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]
12. Effectiveness of three minimal intervention approaches for managing dental caries: survival of restorations after 2 years. Mandari GJ; Truin GJ; van't Hof MA; Frencken JE Caries Res; 2001; 35(2):90-4. PubMed ID: 11275667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Six-year success rates of occlusal amalgam and glass-ionomer restorations placed using three minimal intervention approaches. Mandari GJ; Frencken JE; van't Hof MA Caries Res; 2003; 37(4):246-53. PubMed ID: 12771499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomaterials in Relation to Dentistry. Deb S; Chana S Front Oral Biol; 2015; 17():1-12. PubMed ID: 26201271 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment restorations and sealants under field conditions. Motsei SM; Kroon J; Holtshousen WS SADJ; 2001 Jul; 56(7):309-15. PubMed ID: 11575114 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Minimally invasive dentistry: a review and update. Brostek AM; Bochenek AJ; Walsh LJ Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2006 Jun; 15(3):225-49. PubMed ID: 16862354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Longevity and associated risk factors in adhesive restorations of young permanent teeth after complete and selective caries removal: a retrospective study. Casagrande L; Seminario AT; Correa MB; Werle SB; Maltz M; Demarco FF; Araujo FB Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Apr; 21(3):847-855. PubMed ID: 27103587 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical longevity of extensive direct composite restorations in amalgam replacement: up to 3.5 years follow-up. Scholtanus JD; Ozcan M J Dent; 2014 Nov; 42(11):1404-10. PubMed ID: 24994619 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Repair vs replacement of direct composite restorations: a survey of teaching and operative techniques in Oceania. Brunton PA; Ghazali A; Tarif ZH; Loch C; Lynch C; Wilson N; Blum IR J Dent; 2017 Apr; 59():62-67. PubMed ID: 28232082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. How to intervene in the caries process: proximal caries in adolescents and adults-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Splieth CH; Kanzow P; Wiegand A; Schmoeckel J; Jablonski-Momeni A Clin Oral Investig; 2020 May; 24(5):1623-1636. PubMed ID: 32306093 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]