These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11168237)

  • 1. An in vitro study on compensation of mismatch of screw versus cement-retained implant supported fixed prostheses.
    Pietrabissa R; Gionso L; Quaglini V; Di Martino E; Simion M
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2000 Oct; 11(5):448-57. PubMed ID: 11168237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of prosthesis fit and the effect of a luting system on the prosthetic connection preload: an in vitro study.
    Duyck J; Naert I
    Int J Prosthodont; 2002; 15(4):389-96. PubMed ID: 12170855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. In vitro evaluation of reverse torque value of abutment screw and marginal opening in a screw- and cement-retained implant fixed partial denture design.
    Kim SG; Park JU; Jeong JH; Bae C; Bae TS; Chee W
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(6):1061-7. PubMed ID: 20162110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A Newly Designed Screw- and Cement-Retained Prosthesis and Its Abutments.
    Heo YK; Lim YJ
    Int J Prosthodont; 2015; 28(6):612-4. PubMed ID: 26523721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Pre-load on oral implants after screw tightening fixed full prostheses: an in vivo study.
    Duyck J; Van Oosterwyck H; Vander Sloten J; De Cooman M; Puers R; Naert I
    J Oral Rehabil; 2001 Mar; 28(3):226-33. PubMed ID: 11350577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro stress analyses of dental implants supporting screw-retained and cement-retained prostheses.
    Kim WD; Jacobson Z; Nathanson D
    Implant Dent; 1999; 8(2):141-51. PubMed ID: 10635156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cement- and screw-retained implant-supported prostheses: up to 10 years of follow-up of a new design.
    Preiskel HW; Tsolka P
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(1):87-91. PubMed ID: 14982360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effects of abutment wall height, platform size, and screw access channel filling method on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations.
    Emms M; Tredwin CJ; Setchell DJ; Moles DR
    J Prosthodont; 2007; 16(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 17244301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical performance of a method for the fabrication of implant-supported precisely fitting titanium frameworks: a retrospective 5- to 8-year clinical follow-up study.
    Hedkvist L; Mattsson T; Helldén LB
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2004; 6(3):174-80. PubMed ID: 15726852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Screw- vs cement-implant-retained restorations: an experimental study in the Beagle. Part 1. Screw and abutment loosening.
    Assenza B; Scarano A; Leghissa G; Carusi G; Thams U; Roman FS; Piattelli A
    J Oral Implantol; 2005; 31(5):242-6. PubMed ID: 16265854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. What's your choice: cement- or screw-retained implant restorations?
    Strong SM
    Gen Dent; 2008; 56(1):15-8. PubMed ID: 18254555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fabrication of a cement- and screw-retained multiunit implant restoration.
    Uludag B; Celik G
    J Oral Implantol; 2006; 32(5):248-50. PubMed ID: 17069169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Influence of screw access on the retention of cement-retained implant prostheses.
    da Rocha PV; Freitas MA; de Morais Alves da Cunha T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Apr; 109(4):264-8. PubMed ID: 23566608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations.
    Chee W; Jivraj S
    Br Dent J; 2006 Oct; 201(8):501-507. PubMed ID: 17057675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dynamic fatigue resistance of implant-abutment junction in an internally notched morse-taper oral implant: influence of abutment design.
    Cehreli MC; Akça K; Iplikçioğlu H; Sahin S
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2004 Aug; 15(4):459-65. PubMed ID: 15248881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Retrievable cemented implant restorations.
    Chee WW; Torbati A; Albouy JP
    J Prosthodont; 1998 Jun; 7(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 9743667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Marginal discrepancy of screw-retained and cemented metal-ceramic crowns on implants abutments.
    Keith SE; Miller BH; Woody RD; Higginbottom FL
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1999; 14(3):369-78. PubMed ID: 10379110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An in vitro evaluation of the strength of a 1-piece and 2-piece conical abutment joint in implant design.
    Norton MR
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2000 Oct; 11(5):458-64. PubMed ID: 11168238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fluids and microbial penetration in the internal part of cement-retained versus screw-retained implant-abutment connections.
    Piattelli A; Scarano A; Paolantonio M; Assenza B; Leghissa GC; Di Bonaventura G; Catamo G; Piccolomini R
    J Periodontol; 2001 Sep; 72(9):1146-50. PubMed ID: 11577944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Within-subject comparison between connected and nonconnected tooth-to-implant fixed partial prostheses: up to 14-year follow-up study.
    Hosny M; Duyck J; van Steenberghe D; Naert I
    Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(4):340-6. PubMed ID: 11203652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.