This study aimed to evaluate and compare two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class I post-endodontic restoration in molars. A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 25 for each group); group A: everX Posterior (packable composite) with a top layer of solareX (nano-hybrid composite) and group B: everX Flow (flowable composite) with a top layer of G-aenial universal injectable (flowable composite). Patients were evaluated immediately after the procedure (baseline), at 6 months, and at 1 year time intervals based on the modified USPHS criteria. The statistical analysis using a chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of group A and group B. Clinical p...
The aim of this article was to report the results of an 18-month longitudinal randomized clinical tr...
Methods for restoring endodontically treated teeth fall short of restoring the physiologic mechanica...
Purpose: To evaluate and compare the 2-year clinical performance of an ormocer, a nanohybrid, and a ...
This study evaluated the 3-year clinical performance of four different flowable composite materials ...
PubMed ID: 26438985The aim was to evaluate the effects of fiber-reinforced composite restorations an...
Restoration after endodontic treatment is as important as root canal therapy for clinical success. E...
PURPOSE: Restoration of root-treated teeth is routinely performed in clinical practice with a choice...
Background: Post-retained crowns are indicated for endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with severely ...
Aims The advances in adhesive dentistry have brought new treatment approaches for restoring endodont...
Relevance. The forecast of the functionality of the tooth after endodontic treatment, when resistanc...
To evaluate the fracture strength of endodontically treated molars filled with different composite r...
This study aims to compare the clinical characteristics of a new flowable resin-based composite with...
Background: Coronal restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD...
Background The authors evaluated clinical performances of a packable and a conventional hybrid resi...
This study evaluated the clinical performance of direct restorations made of nanofilled and microhyb...
The aim of this article was to report the results of an 18-month longitudinal randomized clinical tr...
Methods for restoring endodontically treated teeth fall short of restoring the physiologic mechanica...
Purpose: To evaluate and compare the 2-year clinical performance of an ormocer, a nanohybrid, and a ...
This study evaluated the 3-year clinical performance of four different flowable composite materials ...
PubMed ID: 26438985The aim was to evaluate the effects of fiber-reinforced composite restorations an...
Restoration after endodontic treatment is as important as root canal therapy for clinical success. E...
PURPOSE: Restoration of root-treated teeth is routinely performed in clinical practice with a choice...
Background: Post-retained crowns are indicated for endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with severely ...
Aims The advances in adhesive dentistry have brought new treatment approaches for restoring endodont...
Relevance. The forecast of the functionality of the tooth after endodontic treatment, when resistanc...
To evaluate the fracture strength of endodontically treated molars filled with different composite r...
This study aims to compare the clinical characteristics of a new flowable resin-based composite with...
Background: Coronal restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD...
Background The authors evaluated clinical performances of a packable and a conventional hybrid resi...
This study evaluated the clinical performance of direct restorations made of nanofilled and microhyb...
The aim of this article was to report the results of an 18-month longitudinal randomized clinical tr...
Methods for restoring endodontically treated teeth fall short of restoring the physiologic mechanica...
Purpose: To evaluate and compare the 2-year clinical performance of an ormocer, a nanohybrid, and a ...