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.
188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3316043)
21. Wear of composite resin inlays and antagonistic enamel. Young HL; Suzuki S Am J Dent; 1999 Feb; 12(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 10477999 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices? Ferracane JL Dent Mater; 2006 Aug; 22(8):689-92. PubMed ID: 16563492 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Degradation of microfilled posterior composite. Mazer RB; Leinfelder KF; Russell CM Dent Mater; 1992 May; 8(3):185-9. PubMed ID: 1521708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. In vitro wear of indirect composite restoratives. Suzuki S; Nagai E; Taira Y; Minesaki Y J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Oct; 88(4):431-6. PubMed ID: 12447221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of wear and clinical performance between amalgam, composite and open sandwich restorations: 2-year results. Sachdeo A; Gray GB; Sulieman MA; Jagger DC Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2004 Mar; 12(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 15058177 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. An up to 3-year randomized clinical study comparing indirect and direct resin composites used to restore worn posterior teeth. Bartlett D; Sundaram G Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(6):613-7. PubMed ID: 17165303 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of an adhesive bonding system on wear resistance of resin composite restorations. Shinkai K; Suzuki S; Katoh Y Quintessence Int; 1997 Oct; 28(10):687-93. PubMed ID: 9477890 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. In vitro wear resistance of three types of composite resin denture teeth. Zeng J; Sato Y; Ohkubo C; Hosoi T J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Nov; 94(5):453-7. PubMed ID: 16275306 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite. Palaniappan S; Bharadwaj D; Mattar DL; Peumans M; Van Meerbeek B; Lambrechts P Dent Mater; 2009 Nov; 25(11):1302-14. PubMed ID: 19577288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin containing a semiporous filler particle. Leinfelder KF; Isenberg BP; Wright WW; Teixeira LC; Wisniewski JF Am J Dent; 1989 Apr; 2(2):36-41. PubMed ID: 2604957 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. [Experience with composite filling materials for posterior teeth]. Vanherle G; Lambrechts P; Braem M Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1989 Sep; 44(9):664-8. PubMed ID: 2637839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Posterior resin-based composite: review of the literature. Burgess JO; Walker R; Davidson JM Pediatr Dent; 2002; 24(5):465-79. PubMed ID: 12412962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Mechanical properties and three-body wear of veneering composites and their matrices. Reich SM; Petschelt A; Wichmann M; Frankenberger R J Biomed Mater Res A; 2004 Apr; 69(1):65-9. PubMed ID: 14999752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [Comparative in vivo wear-resistance measurements between amalgam and composite materials. Results after 2 years]. Meier C; Lutz F Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1980 Apr; 35(4):489-92. PubMed ID: 6931810 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Pooling of long term clinical wear data for posterior composites. Taylor DF; Bayne SC; Leinfelder KF; Davis S; Koch GG Am J Dent; 1994 Jun; 7(3):167-74. PubMed ID: 7993608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Slow crack propagation in composite restorative materials. Montes-G GM; Draughn RA J Biomed Mater Res; 1987 May; 21(5):629-42. PubMed ID: 3584167 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]