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.
3. Analyses of long-term clinical behavior of class-II amalgam restorations. Jokstad A; Mjör IA Acta Odontol Scand; 1991 Feb; 49(1):47-63. PubMed ID: 2024575 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effect of pulp protection technique on the clinical performance of amalgam restorations: three-year results. Baratieri LN; Machado A; Van Noort R; Ritter AV; Baratieri NM Oper Dent; 2002; 27(4):319-24. PubMed ID: 12120767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation. Palotie U; Eronen AK; Vehkalahti K; Vehkalahti MM J Dent; 2017 Jul; 62():13-17. PubMed ID: 28529175 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical variables affecting the marginal degradation of amalgam restorations. Jokstad A; Mjör IA Acta Odontol Scand; 1990 Dec; 48(6):379-87. PubMed ID: 2288210 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in posterior teeth of young Finnish adults. Palotie U; Vehkalahti M Acta Odontol Scand; 2002 Dec; 60(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12512880 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Preventive resin restorations vs. amalgam restorations: a three-year clinical study. Cloyd S; Gilpatrick RO; Moore D J Tenn Dent Assoc; 1997 Oct; 77(4):36-40. PubMed ID: 9520761 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical evaluation of a compomer and an amalgam primary teeth class II restorations: a 2-year comparative study. Kavvadia K; Kakaboura A; Vanderas AP; Papagiannoulis L Pediatr Dent; 2004; 26(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15185806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical evaluation of amalgam bonding in Class I and II restorations. Mahler DB; Engle JH J Am Dent Assoc; 2000 Jan; 131(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 10649871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The performance of bonded vs. pin-retained complex amalgam restorations: a five-year clinical evaluation. Summitt JB; Burgess JO; Berry TG; Robbins JW; Osborne JW; Haveman CW J Am Dent Assoc; 2001 Jul; 132(7):923-31. PubMed ID: 11480646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Placement and replacement rates of amalgam and composite restorations on posterior teeth in a military population. Owen BD; Guevara PH; Greenwood W US Army Med Dep J; 2017; (2-17):88-94. PubMed ID: 28853125 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Causes of failure among cuspal-coverage amalgam restorations: a clinical survey. McDaniel RJ; Davis RD; Murchison DF; Cohen RB J Am Dent Assoc; 2000 Feb; 131(2):173-7. PubMed ID: 10680384 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cost-effectiveness of composite resins and amalgam in the replacement of amalgam Class II restorations. Tobi H; Kreulen CM; Vondeling H; van Amerongen WE Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1999 Apr; 27(2):137-43. PubMed ID: 10226724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in Class II restorations in primary molars--a three year clinical evaluation. Ostlund J; Möller K; Koch G Swed Dent J; 1992; 16(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 1496459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Long-term evaluation and rerestoration of amalgam restorations. Akerboom HB; Advokaat JG; Van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1993 Feb; 21(1):45-8. PubMed ID: 8432106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The prevalence of postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations. Borgmeijer PJ; Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Akerboom HB; Gruythuysen RJ ASDC J Dent Child; 1991; 58(5):378-83. PubMed ID: 1939803 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]