1. Frencken JE, Peters MC, Eden E,
et al. : Minimal intervention dentistry for managing dental caries-a review: report of a FDI task group.
Int Dent J, 62:223-243, 2012.
2. Banerjee A, Frencken J, Schwendicke F, Innes N : Contemporary operative caries management: consensus recommendations on minimally invasive caries removal.
Br Dent J, 223:215, 2017.
3. Schwendicke F, Frencken J, Ricketts D,
et al. : Managing carious lesions: consensus recommendations on carious tissue removal.
Adv Dent Res, 28:58-67, 2016.
4. Gray G, Shellis P : Infiltration of resin into white spot carieslike lesions of enamel : an in vitro study.
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 10:27-32, 2002.
5. Mueller J, Meyer-Lueckel H, Kielbassa A,
et al. : Inhibition of lesion progression by the penetration of resins in vitro: influence of the application procedure.
Oper Dent, 31:338-345, 2006.
6. Ratledge D, Kidd E, Beighton D : A clinical and microbiological study of approximal carious lesions.
Caries Res, 35:3, 2001.
7. Toda S, Featherstone J : Effects of fluoride dentifrices on enamel lesion formation.
J Dent Res, 87:224-227, 2008.
8. Alani AH, Toh CG : Detection of microleakage around dental restorations: a review.
Oper Dent, 22:173-185, 1997.
9. Landis JR, Koch GG : The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 159-174, 1977.
10. Soncini JA, Maserejian NN, Hayes C,
et al. : The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings From the New England Children’s Amalgam Trial.
J Am Dent Assoc, 138:763-772, 2007.
11. Bernardo M, Luis H, Leitão J,
et al. : Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial.
J Am Dent Assoc, 138:775-783, 2007.
12. Fontana M, González-Cabezas C : Secondary caries and restoration replacement: An unresolved problem.
Compend Contin Educ Dent, 21:15-26, 15-18, 21-14, 26. 2000.
13. Kermanshahi S, Santerre J, Cvitkovitch D, Finer Y : Biodegradation of resin-dentin interfaces increases bacterial microleakage. 89:996-1001, 2010.
14. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Vijay P,
et al. : Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges.
Oper Dent, 28:215-235, 2003.
15. Mjor I, Gordan V : Failure, repair, refurbishing and longevity of restorations.
Oper Dent, 27:528-534, 2002.
16. Prajapati D, Nayak R, Kamath P,
et al. : Effect of resin infiltration on artificial caries: an in vitro evaluation of resin penetration and microhardness.
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent, 10:250, 2017.
17. Kielbassa AM, Ulrich I, Werth VD,
et al. : Resin infiltration of deproteinised natural occlusal subsurface lesions improves initial quality of fissure sealing.
Int J Oral Sci, 9:117, 2017.
18. Körner P, El Gedaily M, Tauböck TT,
et al. : Margin integrity of conservative composite restorations after resin infiltration of demineralized enamel.
J Adhes Dent, 19:483-489, 2017.
19. Park SY, Jeong TS, Kim S : A study on the clinical usage of the flowable composite resin. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 29:255-261, 2002.
20. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Wilkerson M,
et al. : A characterization of first-generation flowable composites.
J Am Dent Assoc, 129:567-577, 1998.
21. Kim YJ, Kwon TY : Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Six Flowable Composite Resins and a Conventional Composite Resin.
Kor J Dent Mater, 43:159-165, 2016.
22. Ding Y, Yao H, Wang G, Song H : A randomized doubleblind placebo-controlled study of the efficacy of Clinpro XT varnish and Gluma dentin desensitizer on dentin hypersensitivity.
Am J Dent, 27:79-83, 2014.
23. Mitra SB, Lee CY, Rusin RP,
et al. : Long-term adhesion and mechanism of bonding of a paste-liquid resin-modified glass-ionomer.
Dent Mater, 25:459-466, 2009.
24. Choi K, Oshida Y, Yi K,
et al. : Microtensile bond strength of glass ionomer cements to artificially created carious dentin.
Oper Dent, 31:590-597, 2006.
25. Alves FBT, Hesse D, Loguercio AD,
et al. : The bonding of glass ionomer cements to caries-affected primary tooth dentin.
Pediatr Dent, 35:320-324, 2013.
26. Burrow M, Nopnakeepong U, Phrukkanon S : A comparison of microtensile bond strengths of several dentin bonding systems to primary and permanent dentin.
Dent Mater, 18:239-245, 2002.
27. Carrera CA, Lan C, Aparicio C,
et al. : The use of microCT with image segmentation to quantify leakage in dental restorations.
Dent Mater, 31:382-390, 2015.
28. Coutinho E, Yoshida Y, Nakayama Y,
et al. : Gel phase formation at resin-modified glass-ionomer/tooth interfaces.
J Dent Res, 86:656-661, 2007.
29. Yiu C, Tay F, Neo J,
et al. : Interaction of glass-ionomer cements with moist dentin.
J Dent Res, 83:283-289, 2004.
30. Shafiei F, Yousefipour B, Farhadpour H : Marginal microleakage of a resin-modified glass-ionomer restoration: Interaction effect of delayed light activation and surface pretreatment. Dent Res J, 12:224, 2015.
31. Parolia A, Adhauliya N, de Moraes Porto I, Mala K : A comparative evaluation of microleakage around class V cavities restored with different tooth colored restorative materials.
Oral Health Dent Manag, 13:120-126, 2014.
32. Nematollahi H, Bagherian A, Mehr MA,
et al. : Microbial microleakage assessment of class V cavities restored with different materials and techniques: A laboratory study.
Dent Res J, 14:344, 2017.
33. Pereira AdFV, Poiate IAVP, Miranda WG Jr, et al. : Influence of restorative techniques on marginal adaptation and dye penetration around Class V restorations. Gen Dent, 60:17-21, 2012.
34. Cho TS, Yoon JH, Kim SG, Lee SH : Ultra-structure and acid etching characteristics of occlusal fissure enamel. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 32:321-331, 2005.
35. Arnold W, Haddad B, Danesh G,
et al. : Enamel surface alterations after repeated conditioning with HCl.
Head Face Med, 11:32, 2015.