146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37468394)
1. Long term clinical performance of 'open sandwich' and 'total-etch' Class II composite resin restorations showing proximal deterioration of glass-ionomer cement.
Opdam NJM; VanBeek V; VanBeek W; Loomans BAC; Pereira-Cenci T; Cenci MS; Laske M
Dent Mater; 2023 Sep; 39(9):800-806. PubMed ID: 37468394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations.
Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA
J Adhes Dent; 2007 Oct; 9(5):469-75. PubMed ID: 18297828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Posterior resin composite restorations with or without resin-modified, glass-ionomer cement lining: a 1-year randomized, clinical trial.
Banomyong D; Harnirattisai C; Burrow MF
J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 Feb; 2(1):63-9. PubMed ID: 25427330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Longevity of extensive class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement.
van Dijken JW; Kieri C; Carlén M
J Dent Res; 1999 Jul; 78(7):1319-25. PubMed ID: 10403459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical evaluation of Giomer and self-etch adhesive compared with nanofilled resin composite and etch-and-rinse adhesive - Results at 8 years.
Tian F; Mu H; Shi Y; Chen X; Zou X; Gao X; Wang X
Dent Mater; 2024 Jul; 40(7):1088-1095. PubMed ID: 38806383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The clinical performance of a glass polyalkenoate (glass ionomer) cement used in a 'sandwich' technique with a composite resin to restore Class II cavities.
Knibbs PJ
Br Dent J; 1992 Feb; 172(3):103-7. PubMed ID: 1739506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 18-year survival of posterior composite resin restorations with and without glass ionomer cement as base.
van de Sande FH; Rodolpho PA; Basso GR; Patias R; da Rosa QF; Demarco FF; Opdam NJ; Cenci MS
Dent Mater; 2015 Jun; 31(6):669-75. PubMed ID: 25863523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A randomized controlled evaluation of posterior resin restorations of an altered resin modified glass-ionomer cement with claimed bioactivity.
van Dijken JWV; Pallesen U; Benetti A
Dent Mater; 2019 Feb; 35(2):335-343. PubMed ID: 30527586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Meta-Analysis of the Influence of Bonding Parameters on the Clinical Outcome of Tooth-colored Cervical Restorations.
Mahn E; Rousson V; Heintze S
J Adhes Dent; 2015 Aug; 17(5):391-403. PubMed ID: 26525003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Long-term dentin retention of etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in non-carious cervical lesions.
van Dijken JW; Pallesen U
Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):915-22. PubMed ID: 18155288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years.
Andersson-Wenckert IE; van Dijken JW; Kieri C
Am J Dent; 2004 Feb; 17(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 15241909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical efficacy of resin-based direct posterior restorations and glass-ionomer restorations - An updated meta-analysis of clinical outcome parameters.
Heintze SD; Loguercio AD; Hanzen TA; Reis A; Rousson V
Dent Mater; 2022 May; 38(5):e109-e135. PubMed ID: 35221127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Clinical evaluation of three restorative materials applied in a minimal intervention caries treatment approach.
Zanata RL; Navarro MF; Barbosa SH; Lauris JR; Franco EB
J Public Health Dent; 2003; 63(4):221-6. PubMed ID: 14682645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations.
Donly KJ; Segura A; Kanellis M; Erickson RL
J Am Dent Assoc; 1999 Oct; 130(10):1459-66. PubMed ID: 10570589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Enamel remineralization on teeth adjacent to Class II glass ionomer restorations.
Segura A; Donly KJ; Stratmann RG
Am J Dent; 1997 Oct; 10(5):247-50. PubMed ID: 9522700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical Effectiveness of a Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement and a Mild One-step Self-etch Adhesive Applied Actively and Passively in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: An 18-Month Clinical Trial.
Jassal M; Mittal S; Tewari S
Oper Dent; 2018; 43(6):581-592. PubMed ID: 29782222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Marginal leakage of combinations of glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations.
Sarne S; Mante MO; Mante FK
J Clin Dent; 1996; 7(1):13-6. PubMed ID: 9238879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Two-year evaluation of class II resin-modified glass ionomer cement/composite open sandwich and composite restorations.
Vilkinis V; Hörsted-Bindslev P; Baelum V
Clin Oral Investig; 2000 Sep; 4(3):133-9. PubMed ID: 11000317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
