153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37809271)
1. Fracture Resistance of Laboratory Composite Versus All-Ceramic Restorations in Class II Inlay Cavity Preparations: An In Vitro Study.
Agarwal S; Gupta V; Srinkhala ; Singh S; Saxena P; Marvaniya J
Cureus; 2023 Sep; 15(9):e44711. PubMed ID: 37809271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Fracture resistance of lab composite versus all-ceramic restorations in class II inlay cavity preparations: An
Bhanot S; Mahajan P; Bajaj N; Monga P; Sood A; Yadav R
J Conserv Dent; 2022; 25(3):258-263. PubMed ID: 35836565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Fracture resistance of prepared premolars restored with bonded new lab composite and all-ceramic inlay/onlay restorations: Laboratory study.
Wafaie RA; Ibrahim Ali A; Mahmoud SH
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2018 May; 30(3):229-239. PubMed ID: 29368375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with all-ceramic inlays and onlays: an in vitro study.
Saridag S; Sevimay M; Pekkan G
Oper Dent; 2013; 38(6):626-34. PubMed ID: 23391033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effect of various resin cements and immediate dentin sealing on tooth fracture resistance of zirconia inlay restorations.
Iketani Y; Kobayashi M; Niizuma Y; Sugai R; Manabe A
Am J Dent; 2021 Aug; 34(4):179-185. PubMed ID: 34370908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of different restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated molars.
Cobankara FK; Unlu N; Cetin AR; Ozkan HB
Oper Dent; 2008; 33(5):526-33. PubMed ID: 18833859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of fracture resistance of teeth restored with ceramic inlay and resin composite: an in vitro study.
Desai PD; Das UK
Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(6):877. PubMed ID: 22484893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Influence of Preparation Design and Restorative Material on Fatigue and Fracture Strength of Restored Maxillary Premolars.
Hofsteenge JW; van den Heijkant IA; Cune MS; Bazos PK; van der Made S; Kerdijk W; Gresnigt M
Oper Dent; 2021 Mar; 46(2):E68-E79. PubMed ID: 34192333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dentin bond strengths of two ceramic inlay systems after cementation with three different techniques and one bonding system.
Ozturk N; Aykent F
J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Mar; 89(3):275-81. PubMed ID: 12644803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Strain measurements and fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars restored with all-ceramic restorations.
Seow LL; Toh CG; Wilson NH
J Dent; 2015 Jan; 43(1):126-32. PubMed ID: 25448436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Fracture strength of minimally prepared resin bonded CEREC inlays.
Tsitrou E; Helvatjoglou-Antoniades M; Pahinis K; van Noort R
Oper Dent; 2009; 34(5):537-43. PubMed ID: 19830967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored With Different Methods.
Mergulhão VA; de Mendonça LS; de Albuquerque MS; Braz R
Oper Dent; 2019; 44(1):E1-E11. PubMed ID: 30715998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of fracture resistance of inlay-retained fixed partial dentures fabricated with different monolithic zirconia materials.
Gumus HS; Polat NT; Yildirim G
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jun; 119(6):959-964. PubMed ID: 28965678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Stress distributions in adhesively cemented ceramic and resin-composite Class II inlay restorations: a 3D-FEA study.
Ausiello P; Rengo S; Davidson CL; Watts DC
Dent Mater; 2004 Nov; 20(9):862-72. PubMed ID: 15451242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Influence of retainer design and number of inlay boxes on the biomechanical behavior of zirconia cantilever resin bonded fixed dental prosthesis.
Kasem AT; Abo-Madina M; Al-Zordk W
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 Apr; 36(4):652-662. PubMed ID: 37737460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Influence of different metal restorations bonded with resin on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.
Costa LC; Pegoraro LF; Bonfante G
J Prosthet Dent; 1997 Apr; 77(4):365-9. PubMed ID: 9104712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fracture resistance of teeth directly and indirectly restored with composite resin and indirectly restored with ceramic materials.
Dalpino PH; Francischone CE; Ishikiriama A; Franco EB
Am J Dent; 2002 Dec; 15(6):389-94. PubMed ID: 12691276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Influence of restorative material and proximal cavity design on the fracture resistance of MOD inlay restoration.
Liu X; Fok A; Li H
Dent Mater; 2014 Mar; 30(3):327-33. PubMed ID: 24424091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
