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.
43. Glass-ionomer cement restorations and secondary caries: a preliminary report. Mjör IA Quintessence Int; 1996 Mar; 27(3):171-4. PubMed ID: 9063229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment and conventional restorative procedures in a hospital clinic: evaluation after 30 months. Gao W; Peng D; Smales RJ; Yip KH Quintessence Int; 2003 Jan; 34(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 12674356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Clinical performance of Class II restorations in which resin composite is laminated over resin-modified glass-ionomer. Aboush YE; Torabzadeh H Oper Dent; 2000; 25(5):367-73. PubMed ID: 11203844 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. The composite resin-amalgam window preparation. Nelson JA Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent; 1992 Aug; 4(6):21-6. PubMed ID: 1391930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. The influence of a packable resin composite, conventional resin composite and amalgam on molar cuspal stiffness. Molinaro JD; Diefenderfer KE; Strother JM Oper Dent; 2002; 27(5):516-24. PubMed ID: 12216572 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. 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]
49. Amalgam--Resurrection and redemption. Part 1: the clinical and legal mythology of anti-amalgam. Wahl MJ Quintessence Int; 2001; 32(7):525-35. PubMed ID: 11495565 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. [Composite or amalgam? Not a black or white decision]. Roeters FJ; Opdam NJ; Burgersdijk RC Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1992 Oct; 99(10):371-4. PubMed ID: 11820006 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Early failure of Class II resin composite versus Class II amalgam restorations placed by dental students. Overton JD; Sullivan DJ J Dent Educ; 2012 Mar; 76(3):338-40. PubMed ID: 22383602 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Preservation-based approaches to restore posterior teeth with amalgam, resin or a combination of materials. Baghdadi ZD Am J Dent; 2002 Feb; 15(1):54-65. PubMed ID: 12074231 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. A technique for esthetic veneering of amalgam. Quiroz L; Swift EJ Compend Contin Educ Dent (Lawrenceville); 1986 May; 7(5):350, 352-4. PubMed ID: 3459632 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. 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]
55. Dental amalgam--what are the alternatives? Tyas MJ Int Dent J; 1994 Aug; 44(4):303-8. PubMed ID: 7822054 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. 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]
57. 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]
59. Prevalence of postoperative sensitivity with indirect Class II resin composite inlays. Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Gruythuysen RJ; Borgmeijer PJ; Akerboom HB ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(2):95-8. PubMed ID: 8486862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. The use of dental amalgam in pediatric dentistry: review of the literature. Osborne JW; Summitt JB; Roberts HW Pediatr Dent; 2002; 24(5):439-47. PubMed ID: 12412958 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]