1. Mount GJ, Hume WR. Preservation and restoration of tooth structure. 1998. Philadelphia: Mosby;126–153.
2. Lacy AM. The class III posterior composite restoration. Dent Today. 2002. 80–82. 84–85.
3. Setien V, Armstrong SR, Vargas MA. Conservative restoration of proximal-cervical lesions. Oper Dent. 2003. 28(3):321–323.
4. Abu-Hanna AA, Mjör IA. Resin composite reinforcement of undermined enamel. Oper Dent. 2004. 29(2):234–237.
5. Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass-ionomer cement. Quintessence Int. 1988. 30(3):197–200.
6. Mount GJ. An Atlas of Glass-ionomer cements. 1994. second ed. London: Martin Dunitz;118–122.
7. Denehy GE, Torney DL. Internal enamel reinforcement through micromechanical bonding. J Prosthet Dent. 1976. 36(2):171–175.
Article
8. Eakle WS, Staninec M. Effect of bonded gold inlays on fracture resistance of teeth. Quintessence Int. 1992. 23:421–425.
9. Jagadish S, Yogesh BG. Fracture resistance of teeth with class II silver amalgam, posterior composite and glass cermet restorations. Oper Dent. 1990. 15(2):42–47.
10. Borges AFS, Correr GM, Sinhoreti MAC, Consani S, Sobrinho LC, Rontani RMP. Compressive strength recovered by composite onlays in primary teeth Substrate treatment and luting agent effects. J Dent. 2006. 34:478–484.
11. Roggenkamp CL, Cochran MA, Lund MR. The facial slot preparation: a non-occlusal option for Class 2 carious lesions. Oper Dent. 1982. 7(3):102–106.
12. Croll TP. Lateral-access class II restoration using resin-modified glass-ionomer or silver-cermet cement. Quintessence Int. 1995. 26:121–126.
13. Gorucu J, Ozgunaltay G. Fracture resistance of teeth with class II bonded amalgam and new tooth-colored restorations. Oper Dent. 2003. 28(5):501–507.
14. Johnston WM, Leung RL, Fan PL. A mathematical model for post-irradiation hardening of photoactivated composite resins. Dent Mater. 1985. 1(5):191–194.
Article
15. Eick JD, Welch FH. Dentin adhesives-do they protect the dentin from acid etching? Quintessence Int. 1986. 17(9):533–544.
16. Wieczkowski G, Joynt RB, Klockowski R, Davis EL. Effects of incremental versus bulk fill technique on resistance to cuspal fracture of teeth restored with posterior composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1988. 60(3):283–287.
Article
17. Martins LRM, Secco AS. Influence of the glass ionomer cement and composite resin on enamel supported and its effect in the cuspal stiffness and flexure. J Dent Res. 1997. 76:Abstract No. 3232.
18. Eidelman E. Composite resin support of undermined enamel in amalgam restorations. Pediatr Dent. 1999. 21:118–120.
19. Yaman SD, Yetmez M, Turkoz E, Akkas N. Fracture resistance of class II approximal slot restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 84:297–302.
Article
20. Gracis SE, Nicholls JI, Chalupnik JD, Yuodelis RA. Shock-absorbing behavior of five restorative materials used on implants. Int J Prosthodont. 1991. 4:282–291.
21. Strand GV, Tveit AB, Gjerdet NR. Marginal ridge strength of tunnel-prepared teeth restored with various adhesive filling materials. Cement Concr Res. 1999. 29:645–650.
Article
22. St-Georges AJ, Sturdevant JR, Swift EJ Jr, Thompson JY. Fracture resistance of prepared teeth restored with bonded inlay restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2003. 89:551–557.
Article
23. Latino C, Troendle K, Summitt JB. Support of undermined occlusal enamel provided by restorative materials. Quintessence Int. 2001. 32:287–291.