Author:
Innes N P T,Stirrups D R,Evans D J P,Hall N,Leggate M
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT . Longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth: three-year results. J Dent Res 1997; 76:1387–1396.
2. Welbury RR, Walls AW, Murray JJ, McCabe JF . The 5-year results of a clinical trial comparing a glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement restoration with an amalgam restoration. Br Dent J 1991; 170: 177–181.
3. Attin T, Opatowski A, Meyer C et al. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite. Am J Dent 2001; 14:148–152.
4. Duggal MS, Toumba KJ, Sharma NK . Clinical performance of a compomer and amalgam for the interproximal restoration of primary molars: a 24-month evaluation. Br Dent J 2002; 193:339–342.
5. Gross LC, Griffen AL, Casamassimo PS . Compomers as Class II restorations in primary molars. Ped Dent 2001; 23:24–27.
Cited by
99 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献