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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

156 related items for PubMed ID: 22666833

  • 1. A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 1-year follow-up.
    Coelho-De-Souza FH, Camargo JC, Beskow T, Balestrin MD, Klein-Júnior CA, Demarco FF.
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2012; 20(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 22666833
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Double-blind randomized clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 6-month follow-up.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH, Klein-Júnior CA, Camargo JC, Beskow T, Balestrin MD, Demarco FF.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 Mar 01; 11(2):001-8. PubMed ID: 20228981
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Influence of adhesive system and bevel preparation on fracture strength of teeth restored with composite resin.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH, Rocha Ada C, Rubini A, Klein-Júnior CA, Demarco FF.
    Braz Dent J; 2010 Mar 01; 21(4):327-31. PubMed ID: 20976383
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Three-year clinical evaluation of different restorative resins in class I restorations.
    Yazici AR, Ustunkol I, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B.
    Oper Dent; 2014 Mar 01; 39(3):248-55. PubMed ID: 24754716
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Fracture resistance and gap formation of MOD restorations: influence of restorative technique, bevel preparation and water storage.
    Coelho-De-Souza FH, Camacho GB, Demarco FF, Powers JM.
    Oper Dent; 2008 Mar 01; 33(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 18335731
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Effect of light source position and bevel placement on facial margin adaptation of resin-based composite restorations.
    Hoelscher DC, Gregory WA, Linger JB, Pink FE.
    Am J Dent; 2000 Aug 01; 13(4):171-5. PubMed ID: 11763925
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Polymerization contraction stresses of resin-based composite restorations within beveled cavity preparations of Class I restorations.
    Kinomoto Y, Torii M, Takeshige F, Ebisu S.
    Am J Dent; 2003 Apr 01; 16(2):139-43. PubMed ID: 12797575
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Split mouth randomized controlled clinical trial of beveled cavity preparations in primary molars: an 18-Month follow up.
    Oliveira CA, Dias PF, Dos Santos MP, Maia LC.
    J Dent; 2008 Sep 01; 36(9):754-8. PubMed ID: 18579283
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of Class V composite restorations: three-year results.
    Baratieri LN, Canabarro S, Lopes GC, Ritter AV.
    Oper Dent; 2003 Sep 01; 28(5):482-7. PubMed ID: 14531591
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. A randomized trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 24-month results.
    dos Santos MP, Passos M, Luiz RR, Maia LC.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Feb 01; 140(2):156-66; quiz 247-8. PubMed ID: 19188412
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. In vitro evaluation of margins of replaced resin-based composite restorations.
    Gordan VV.
    J Esthet Dent; 2000 Feb 01; 12(4):209-15. PubMed ID: 11323864
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Comparative clinical evaluation between self-adhesive and conventional bulk-fill composites in class II cavities: A 1-year randomized controlled clinical study.
    Ellithy MS, Abdelrahman MH, Afifi RR.
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2024 Sep 01; 36(9):1311-1325. PubMed ID: 38655672
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Marginal adaptation and seal of direct and indirect Class II composite resin restorations: an in vitro evaluation.
    Dietschi D, Scampa U, Campanile G, Holz J.
    Quintessence Int; 1995 Feb 01; 26(2):127-38. PubMed ID: 7568723
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Influence of beveling and ultrasound application on marginal adaptation of box-only Class II (slot) resin composite restorations.
    Schmidlin PR, Wolleb K, Imfeld T, Gygax M, Lussi A.
    Oper Dent; 2007 Feb 01; 32(3):291-7. PubMed ID: 17555182
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Necessity of bevels for box only Class II composite restorations.
    Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, Kuijs R, Burgersdijk RC.
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Sep 01; 80(3):274-9. PubMed ID: 9760359
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Influence of restorative technique, beveling, and aging on composite bonding to sectioned incisal edges.
    Coelho-de-Souza FH, Camacho GB, Demarco FF, Powers JM.
    J Adhes Dent; 2008 Feb 01; 10(2):113-7. PubMed ID: 18512508
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in Class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine.
    Dietrich T, Lösche AC, Lösche GM, Roulet JF.
    J Dent; 1999 Feb 01; 27(2):119-28. PubMed ID: 10071469
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Effect of curing unit and adhesive system on marginal adaptation of composite restorations.
    Casselli DS, Faria-e-Silva AL, Casselli H, Martins LR.
    Gen Dent; 2012 Feb 01; 60(6):e408-12. PubMed ID: 23220321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.
    Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JR, Navarro MF, de Carvalho RM.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2010 May 01; 11(3):025-32. PubMed ID: 20461321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique.
    Baratieri LN, Ritter AV.
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2001 May 01; 13(1):50-7. PubMed ID: 11831309
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.