The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 8 ( 2018 ) > List of Articles


A Systematic Review of Amalgam Bonded Restorations: In vitro and Clinical Findings

Michael G Botelho, Nithya Jagannathan, Ho CM Brian, Otto LT Lam

Keywords : Adhesives, Bond strength, Bonded amalgam, Longevity, Microleakage, Sensitivity, Systematic review.

Citation Information : Botelho MG, Jagannathan N, Brian HC, Lam OL. A Systematic Review of Amalgam Bonded Restorations: In vitro and Clinical Findings. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (8):1013-1024.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2374

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-08-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Aim: This article aims to systematically review the evidence reporting on physical properties of bonded amalgam, its clinical performance, and implications. Materials and methods: An electronic search in “Medline” (search term: Amalgam and Dentin bonding) from 1987 to 2013 yielded 465 publications out of which 170 articles were selected for the analysis. Data were extracted relating to the bond strength of amalgam to dentin, microleakage, postoperative sensitivity, and longevity of bonded amalgam restorations. Results: A total of 129 in vitro studies out of 170 articles showed high bond strengths with filled adhesive resins and light-cured adhesives, in particular Amalgambond plus and Optibond adhesives. Thickness of bonding agent, type of alloy, and thermocycling showed inconclusive outcomes between bonded and nonbonded amalgam restorations. Majority of studies reported reduced microleakage when dentin bonding agents and resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RM-GICs) were used with amalgam. However, water stored, thermocycled, and spherical amalgam alloys resulted in higher microleakage. While bonded amalgam facilitated the retention of large restorations, reduction in postoperative sensitivity was not consistently observed between bonded and nonbonded amalgam restorations. Conclusion: While bonded amalgam restorations reduce the need for mechanical retention conserving tooth structure and reducing the adverse effects of microleakage, there is lack of consistent evidence across all outcome domains to advocate the benefit of bonding of all amalgam restorations. Despite this, it can be considered the material of choice for large restorations and bonding enhances retention in vitro which can be considered beneficial clinically. Clinical significance: The use of adhesives to bond amalgam to the tooth structure offers potential advantages, as it helps in conservative cavity preparation without compromising the retention to tooth, making it a material of choice in large posterior restorations.

PDF Share
  1. Christensen GJ. Longevity of posterior tooth dental restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2005 Feb;136(2):201-203.
  2. Antony K, Genser D, Hiebinger C, Windisch F. Longevity of dental amalgam in comparison to composite materials. GMS Health Technol Assess 2008 Nov;4:Doc12.
  3. Wassell RW, Smart ER, St George G. Crowns and other extracoronal restorations: cores for teeth with vital pulps. Br Dent J 2002 May;192(9):499-502, 505-509.
  4. Mahler DB, Bryant RW. Microleakage of amalgam alloys: an update. J Am Dent Assoc 1996 Sep;127(9):1351-1356.
  5. Shenoy A. Is it the end of the road for dental amalgam? A critical review. J Conserv Dent 2008 Jul-Sep;11(3):99-107.
  6. Cenci MS, Piva E, Potrich F, Formolo E, Demarco FF, Powers JM. Microleakage in bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive materials. Braz Dent J 2004 Aug;15(1): 13-18.
  7. Setcos JC, Staninec M, Wilson NH. A two-year randomized, controlled clinical evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations. J Adhes Dent 1999 Winter;1(4):323-331.
  8. Mach Z, Regent J, Staninec M, Mrklas L, Setcos JC. The integrity of bonded amalgam restorations: a clinical evaluation after five years. J Am Dent Assoc 2002 Apr;133(4):460-467.
  9. Mahler DB, Engle JH. Clinical evaluation of amalgam bonding in class I and II restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2000 Jan;131(1):43-49.
  10. Opdam NJ, van de Sande FH, Bronkhorst E, Cenci MS, Bottenberg P, Pallesen U, Gaengler P, Lindberg A, Huysmans MC, van Dijken JW. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 2014 Oct;93(10):943-949.
  11. Edlich R, Mason SS, Chase ME, Fisher AL, Gubler K, Long WB 3rd, Newkrik AT. Revolutionary advances in the prevention of demyelinating diseases. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol 2009;28(2):143-152.
  12. Jones DW. Has dental amalgam been torpedoed and sunk? J Dent Res 2008 Feb;87(2):101-102.
  13. Mackey TK, Contreras JT, Liang BA. The Minamata Convention on Mercury: attempting to address the global controversy of dental amalgam use and mercury waste disposal. Sci Total Environ 2014 Feb;472:125-129.
  14. The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology. A comprehensive review of the toxic effects of mercury in dental amalgam fillings on the environment and human health. The toxic effects of dental amalgam. ChampionsGate (FL): IAOMT; 2016. [cited 2016 Feb 8]. p. 1-26. Available from: Review-Dental-Mercury.pdf.
  15. Imbery TA, Burgess JO, Batzer RC. Comparing the resistance of dentin bonding agents and pins in amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1995 Jun;126(6):753-759.
  16. Imbery TA, Hilton TJ, Reagan SE. Retention of complex amalgam restorations using self-threading pins, amalgapins, and Amalgambond. Am J Dent 1995 Jun;8(3):117-121.
  17. Shimizu A, Ui T, Kawakami M. Bond strength between amalgam and tooth hard tissues with application of fluoride, glass ionomer cement and adhesive resin cement in various combinations. Dent Mater J 1986 Dec;5(2):225-232.
  18. Grobler SR, Oberholzer TG, Rossouw RJ, Grobler-Rabie A, Van Wyk Kotze TJ. Shear bond strength, microleakage, and confocal studies of 4 amalgam alloy bonding agents. Quintessence Int 2000 Jul-Aug;31(7):501-508.
  19. Bagley A, Wakefield CW, Robbins JW. In vitro comparison of filled and unfilled universal bonding agents of amalgam to dentin. Oper Dent 1994 May-Jun;19(3):97-101.
  20. Ratananakin T, Denehy GE, Vargas MA. Effect of condensation techniques on amalgam bond strengths to dentin. Oper Dent 1996 Sep-Oct;21(5):191-195.
  21. Vargas MA, Denehy GE, Ratananakin T. Amalgam shear bond strength to dentin using different bonding agents. Oper Dent 1994 Nov-Dec;19(6):224-227.
  22. Diefenderfer KE, Reinhardt JW. Shear bond strengths of 10 adhesive resin/amalgam combinations. Oper Dent 1997 Mar-Apr;22(2):50-56.
  23. Chang J, Scherer W, Tauk A, Martini R. Shear bond strength of a 4-META adhesive system. J Prosthet Dent 1992 Jan;67(1):42-45.
  24. Nakabayashi N, Watanabe A, Gendusa NJ. Dentin adhesion of “modified” 4-META/MMA-TBB resin: function of HEMA. Dent Mater 1992 Jul;8(4):259-264.
  25. Hasegawa T, Retief DH, Russell CM, Denys FR. A laboratory study of the Amalgambond Adhesive System. Am J Dent 1992 Aug;5(4):181-186.
  26. Kamel MM, Elsayed HY, Abdalla AI, Darrag AM. The effect of water storage on micro-shear bond strength of contemporary composite resins using different dentin adhesive systems. Tanta Dent J 2014 Apr;11(1):47-55.
  27. Pashley EL, Comer RW, Parry EE, Pashley DH. Amalgam buildups: shear strength and dentin sealing properties. Oper Dent 1991 May-Jun;16(3):82-89.
  28. Overton JD, Vance RI. Effect of adhesive volume on the bond strength of bonded complex amalgam restorations. Am J Dent 2005 Dec;18(6):320-322.
  29. Barkmeier WW, Gendusa NJ, Thurmond JW, Triolo PT Jr. Laboratory evaluation of Amalgambond and Amalgambond Plus. Am J Dent 1994 Oct;7(5):239-242.
  30. Miyazaki M, Ando S, Hinoura K, Onose H, Moore BK. Influence of filler addition to bonding agents on shear bond strength to bovine dentin. Dent Mater 1995 Jul;11(4): 234-238.
  31. Staninec M, Giles WS, Saiku JM, Hattori M. Caries penetration and cement thickness of three luting agents. Int J Prosthodont 1988 Nov-Dec;1(3):259-263.
  32. Cobb DS, Denehy GE, Vargas MA. Amalgam shear bond strength to dentin using single-bottle primer/adhesive systems. Am J Dent 1999 Oct;12(5):222-226.
  33. Li Y, Swartz ML, Phillips RW, Moore BK, Roberts TA. Effect of filler content and size on properties of composites. J Dent Res 1985 Dec;64(12):1396-1401.
  34. Braem M, Lambrechts P, Van Doren V, Vanherle G. The impact of composite structure on its elastic response. J Dent Res 1986 May;65(5):648-653.
  35. Ruzickova T, Staninec M, Marshall GW, Hutton JE. Bond strengths of the adhesive resin-amalgam interface. Am J Dent 1997 Aug;10(4):192-194.
  36. de Menezes MJ, Arrais CA, Giannini M. Influence of lightactivated and auto- and dual-polymerizing adhesive systems on bond strength of indirect composite resin to dentin. J Prosthet Dent 2006 Aug;96(2):115-121.
  37. Cianconi L, Conte G, Mancini M. Shear bond strength, failure modes, and confocal microscopy of bonded amalgam restorations. Dent Mater J 2011 Mar;30(2):216-221.
  38. Ruyter E. Composite dental restorative materials. Tandlaegebladet 1985 Jan;89(2):67-70.
  39. Morrill F, Galburt R, Kuzel G, Zive M, Habib C. Comparison of different shaped particles of amalgam alloy bonded to composite and dentin with 4-methacryloxyethyl trimettalite anhydride. J Dent Res 1994 Mar; 73(1):221.
  40. Cooley RL, Tseng EY, Barkmeier WW. Dentinal bond strengths and microleakage of a 4-META adhesive to amalgam and composite resin. Quintessence Int 1991 Dec;22(12):979-983.
  41. Chen RS, Liu CC, Cheng MR, Lin CP. Bonded amalgam restorations: using a glass-ionomer as an adhesive liner. Oper Dent 2000 Sep-Oct;25(5):411-417.
  42. Belcher MA, Kunsemiller JA. Bonding amalgam to a resinmodified glass-ionomer base. Am J Dent 1999 Dec;12(6): 305-308.
  43. Dhanasomboon S, Nikaido T, Shimada Y, Tagami J. Bonding amalgam to enamel: shear bond strength and SEM morphology. J Prosthet Dent 2001 Sep;86(3):297-303.
  44. Miller BH, Arita K, Tamura N, Nishino M, Guo I, Okabe T. Bond strengths of various materials to dentin using Amalgambond. Am J Dent 1992 Oct;5(5):272-276.
  45. Garcia-Barbero AE, Garcia-Barbero J, Lopez-Calvo JA. Bonding of amalgam to composite: tensile strength and morphology study. Dent Mater 1994 Mar;10(2):83-87.
  46. DeSchepper EJ, Cailleteau JG, Roeder L, Powers JM. In vitro tensile bond strengths of amalgam to treated dentin. J Esthet Dent 1991 Jul-Aug;3(4):117-120.
  47. Muniz M, Quioca J, Dolci GS, Reis A, Loguercio AD. Bonded amalgam restorations: microleakage and tensile bond strength evaluation. Oper Dent 2005 Mar-Apr;30(2):228-233.
  48. Symons AL, Wing G, Hewitt GH. Adaptation of dental amalgam to the cavosurface margin of class I cavity preparations. J Oral Rehabil 1987 Jan;14(1):65-76.
  49. Korale ME, Meiers JC. Microleakage of dentin bonding systems used with spherical and admixed amalgams. Am J Dent 1996 Dec;9(6):249-252.
  50. Kidd EA. Microleakage in relation to amalgam and composite restorations. A laboratory study. Br Dent J 1976 Nov;141(10):305-310.
  51. Grossman ES, Witcomb MJ, Jodaikin A. Elements in marginal seals at amalgam-tooth interfaces. J Dent Res 1986 Jul;65(7):998-1000.
  52. Phillips, RW. Skinner's science of dental materials. 9th ed. Philadelphia (PA): W.B. Saunders Co.; 1991. p. 303-347.
  53. Jodaikin A. Experimental microleakage around ageing dental amalgam restorations: a review. J Oral Rehabil 1981 Nov;8(6):517-526.
  54. Berry FA, Parker SD, Rice D, Munoz CA. Microleakage of amalgam restorations using dentin bonding system primers. Am J Dent 1996 Aug;9(4):174-178.
  55. Briso AL, Campos IT, Sundfeld RH, Rodrigues Junior AL, Pimenta LA. Microleakage of adhesively bonded cervical amalgam restorations. Am J Dent 2002 Jun;15(3):173-176.
  56. Meiers JC, Turner EW. Microleakage of dentin/amalgam alloy bonding agents: results after 1 year. Oper Dent 1998 Jan-Feb;23(1):30-35.
  57. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 2003 May-Jun;28(3):215-235.
  58. Turner EW, St Germain HA, Meiers JC. Microleakage of dentin-amalgam bonding agents. Am J Dent 1995 Aug;8(4): 191-196.
  59. Saiku JM, St Germain HA Jr, Meiers JC. Microleakage of a dental amalgam alloy bonding agent. Oper Dent 1993 Sep-Oct;18(5):172-178.
  60. Tangsgoolwatana J, Cochran MA, Moore BK, Li Y. Microleakage evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations: confocal microscopy versus radioisotope. Quintessence Int 1997 Jul;28(7):467-477.
  61. Toledano M, Osorio E, Osorio R, Garcia-Godoy F. Microleakage and SEM interfacial micromorphology of amalgam restorations using three adhesive systems. J Dent 2000 Aug;28(6): 423-428.
  62. Sano H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Horner JA, Matthews WG, Pashley DH. Nanoleakage: leakage within the hybrid layer. Oper Dent 1995 Jan-Feb;20(1):18-25.
  63. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Controlling dentine penetration in computer microleakage tracer mapping. J Dent 1997 Mar;25(2):129-136.
  64. Staninec M, Holt M. Bonding of amalgam to tooth structure: tensile adhesion and microleakage tests. J Prosthet Dent 1988 Apr;59(4):397-402.
  65. Ben-Amar A, Liberman R, Judes H, Nordenberg D. Long-term use of dentine adhesive as an interfacial sealer under class II amalgam restorations. J Oral Rehabil 1990 Jan;17(1):37-42.
  66. Ben-Amar A, Nordenberg D, Liberman R, Fischer J, Gorfil C. The control of marginal microleakage in amalgam restorations using a dentin adhesive: a pilot study. Dent Mater 1987 Apr;3(2):94-96.
  67. Charlton DG, Moore BK, Swartz ML. In vitro evaluation of the use of resin liners to reduce microleakage and improve retention of amalgam restorations. Oper Dent 1992 May-Jun;17(3):112-119.
  68. Belli S, Unlu N, Ozer F. Effect of cavity varnish, amalgam liner or dentin bonding agents on the marginal leakage of amalgam restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2001 May;28(5):492-496.
  69. Yu XY, Wei G, Xu JW. Experimental use of a bonding agent to reduce marginal microleakage in amalgam restorations. Quintessence Int 1987 Nov;18(11):783-787.
  70. Silva e Souza Junior MH, Retief DH, Russell CM, Denys FR. Shear bond strength and microleakage of All-Bond. Am J Dent 1993 Jun;6(3):148-154.
  71. Helvatjoglou-Antoniades M, Theodoridou-Pahini S, Papadogiannis Y, Karezis A. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations: effect of thermal cycling. Oper Dent 2000 Jul-Aug;25(4):316-323.
  72. McCabe JF, Watts DC, Wilson HJ, Worthington HV. An investigation of test-house variability in the mechanical testing of dental materials and the statistical treatment of results. J Dent 1990 Apr;18(2):90-97.
  73. Ben-Amar A, Liberman R, Rothkoff Z, Cardash HS. Long term sealing properties of Amalgambond under amalgam restorations. Am J Dent 1994 Jun;7(3):141-143.
  74. Mahler DB, Nelson LW. Factors affecting the marginal leakage of amalgam. J Am Dent Assoc 1984 Jan;108(1):51-54.
  75. Winkler MM, Moore BK, Rhodes B, Swartz M. Microleakage and retention of bonded amalgam restorations. Am J Dent 2000 Oct;13(5):245-250.
  76. Neme AL, Evans DB, Maxson BB. Evaluation of dental adhesive systems with amalgam and resin composite restorations: comparison of microleakage and bond strength results. Oper Dent 2000 Nov-Dec;25(6):512-519.
  77. Fritz UB, Finger WJ, Stean H. Salivary contamination during bonding procedures with a one-bottle adhesive system. Quintessence Int 1998 Sep;29(9):567-572.
  78. da Silva AF, Piva E, Demarco FF, Correr Sobrinho L, Osinga PW. Microleakage in conventional and bonded amalgam restorations: influence of cavity volume. Oper Dent 2006 May-Jun;31(3):377-383.
  79. Marchiori S, Baratieri LN, de Andrada MA, Monteiro Junior S, Ritter AV. The use of liners under amalgam restorations: an in vitro study on marginal leakage. Quintessence Int 1998 Oct;29(10):637-642.
  80. de Morais PM, Rodrigues Junior AL, Pimenta LA. Quantitative microleakage evaluation around amalgam restorations with different treatments on cavity walls. Oper Dent 1999 Jul;24(4):217-222.
  81. Summitt JB, Burgess JO, Berry TG, Robbins JW, Osborne JW, Haveman CW. Six-year clinical evaluation of bonded and pin-retained complex amalgam restorations. Oper Dent 2004 May-Jun;29(3):261-268.
  82. Summitt JB, Burgess JO, Berry TG, Robbins JW, Osborne JW, Haveman CW. The performance of bonded vs. pin-retained complex amalgam restorations: a five-year clinical evaluation. J Am Dent Assoc 2001 Jul;132(7):923-931.
  83. Belcher MA, Stewart GP. Two-year clinical evaluation of an amalgam adhesive. J Am Dent Assoc 1997 Mar;128(3):309-314.
  84. Davis R, Overton JD. Efficacy of bonded and nonbonded amalgam in the treatment of teeth with incomplete fractures. J Am Dent Assoc 2000 Apr;131(4):469-478.
  85. Al-Omari QD, Al-Omari WM, Omar R. Factors associated with postoperative sensitivity of amalgam restorations. J Ir Dent Assoc 2009 Apr-May;55(2):87-91.
  86. Ben-Amar A, Cardash HS, Judes H. The sealing of the tooth/ amalgam interface by corrosion products. J Oral Rehabil 1995 Feb;22(2):101-104.
  87. Smales RJ, Wetherell JD. Review of bonded amalgam restorations, and assessment in a general practice over five years. Oper Dent 2000 Sep-Oct;25(5):374-381.
  88. Mahler DB, Engle JH, Simms LE, Terkla LG. One-year clinical evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1996 Mar;127(3):345-349, quiz 391.
  89. Browning WD, Johnson WW, Gregory PN. Reduction of postoperative pain: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc 1997 Dec;128(12):1661-1667.
  90. Gordan VV, Mjor IA, Hucke RD, Smith GE. Effect of different liner treatments on postoperative sensitivity of amalgam restorations. Quintessence Int 1999 Jan;30(1):55-59.
  91. Kennington LB, Davis RD, Murchison DF, Langenderfer WR. Short-term clinical evaluation of post-operative sensitivity with bonded amalgams. Am J Dent 1998 Aug;11(4):177-180.
  92. Subay RK, Cox CF, Kaya H, Tarim B, Subay AA, Nayir M. Human pulp reaction to dentine bonded amalgam restorations: a histologic study. J Dent 2000 Jul;28(5):327-332.
  93. WHO. Future use of materials for dental restoration: report of the meeting convened at WHO HQ. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009. p. 65.
  94. Risher, JF. Elemental mercury and inorganic mercury compounds: human health aspects. Geneva: World Health Organization: joint sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Labour Organization, and the World Health Organization; 2003. p. 61.
  95. Dye BA, Schober SE, Dillon CF, Jones RL, Fryar C, McDowell M, Sinks TH. Urinary mercury concentrations associated with dental restorations in adult women aged 16-49 years: United States, 1999-2000. Occup Environ Med 2005 Jun;62(6):368-375.
  96. USPHS DoHa. Dental amalgam: a scientific review and recommended public health service strategy for research, education and regulation. Washington (DC): University of Michigan Library; 1993. p. 216.
  97. Bellinger DC, Trachtenberg F, Barregard L, Tavares M, Cernichiari E, Daniel D, McKinlay S. Neuropsychological and renal effects of dental amalgam in children: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006 Apr;295(15):1775-1783.
  98. AMAP/UNEP. Technical background report for the global mercury assessment 2013. Geneva/Oslo: Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme/UNEP Chemicals Branch; 2013.
  99. Nagpal N, Bettiol SS, Isham A, Hoang H, Crocombe LA. A review of mercury exposure and health of dental personnel. Saf Health Work 2017 Mar;8(1):1-10.
  100. Norwegian Ministry of the Environment. Amendment of regulations of 1 June 2004 no 922 relating to restrictions on the use of chemicals and other products hazardous to health and the environment. Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of the Environment; 2008.
  101. KIFS. The Swedish Chemicals Agency's chemical products and biotechnical organisms regulations. Sweden: KIFS; 2008. [cited 2008 May 14]. Available from: http://www.government. se/contentassets/12c4d85c2ca64d05827fc131f1a47ab9/ sweden-will-ban-the-use-of-mercury.
  102. Mudgal, S.; Long, LV.; Mitsios, A.; Pahal, S.; De Toni, A.; Hylander, L. Study on the potential for reducing mercury pollution from dental amalgam and batteries. Final report prepared for the European Commission—DG ENV. Paris: BIO Intelligence Service; 2012.
  103. Health and Environment Alliance, HCwH. Mercury and dental amalgams. Brussels: Health and Environment Alliance; 2007.
  104. Beazoglou T, Eklund S, Heffley D, Meiers J, Brown LJ, Bailit H. Economic impact of regulating the use of amalgam restorations. Public Health Rep 2007 Sep-Oct;122(5):657-663.
  105. World Dental Federation. General assembly resolution, September 2010. Geneva; 2010.
  106. Lynch CD, Wilson NH. Managing the phase-down of amalgam: part I. Educational and training issues. Br Dent J 2013 Aug;215(3):109-113.
  107. Eriksen HH, Perrez FX. The Minamata Convention: A Comprehensive Response to a Global Problem. Rev Eur Compar Int Environ Law 2014 Aug;23(2):195-210.
  108. Vargas CM, Crall JJ, Schneider DA. Sociodemographic distribution of pediatric dental caries: NHANES III, 1988-1994. J Am Dent Assoc 1998 Sep;129(9):1229-1238.
  109. Bogacki RE, Hunt RJ, del Aguila M, Smith WR. Survival analysis of posterior restorations using an insurance claims database. Oper Dent 2002 Sep-Oct;27(5):488-492.
  110. Fleisch AF, Sheffield PE, Chinn C, Edelstein BL, Landrigan PJ. Bisphenol A and related compounds in dental materials. Pediatrics 2010 Oct;126(4):760-768.
  111. Polydorou O, Konig A, Hellwig E, Kummerer K. Long-term release of monomers from modern dental-composite materials. Eur J Oral Sci 2009 Feb;117(1):68-75.
  112. Yang J, Chan KM. Evaluation of the toxic effects of brominated compounds (BDE-47, 99, 209, TBBPA) and bisphenol A (BPA) using a zebrafish liver cell line, ZFL. Aquat Toxicol 2015 Feb;159:138-147.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.