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 *

299 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12737249)

  • 1. Fracture strength and failure mode of five different single-tooth implant-abutment combinations.
    Strub JR; Gerds T
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(2):167-71. PubMed ID: 12737249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Fracture resistance of single-tooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: an in vitro study.
    Att W; Kurun S; Gerds T; Strub JR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Feb; 95(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 16473084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Fracture resistance of single-tooth implant-supported all-ceramic restorations after exposure to the artificial mouth.
    Att W; Kurun S; Gerds T; Strub JR
    J Oral Rehabil; 2006 May; 33(5):380-6. PubMed ID: 16629897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fracture resistance and failure location of zirconium and metallic implant abutments.
    Aramouni P; Zebouni E; Tashkandi E; Dib S; Salameh Z; Almas K
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Nov; 9(7):41-8. PubMed ID: 18997915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Implant-abutment interface design affects fatigue and fracture strength of implants.
    Steinebrunner L; Wolfart S; Ludwig K; Kern M
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2008 Dec; 19(12):1276-84. PubMed ID: 19040443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Zirconia-implant-supported all-ceramic crowns withstand long-term load: a pilot investigation.
    Kohal RJ; Klaus G; Strub JR
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2006 Oct; 17(5):565-71. PubMed ID: 16958698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The comparison of provisional luting agents and abutment surface roughness on the retention of provisional implant-supported crowns.
    Kim Y; Yamashita J; Shotwell JL; Chong KH; Wang HL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Jun; 95(6):450-5. PubMed ID: 16765158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dynamic fatigue properties of the dental implant-abutment interface: joint opening in wide-diameter versus standard-diameter hex-type implants.
    Hoyer SA; Stanford CM; Buranadham S; Fridrich T; Wagner J; Gratton D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jun; 85(6):599-607. PubMed ID: 11404760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Strength and mode of failure of single implant all-ceramic abutment restorations under static load.
    Tripodakis AP; Strub JR; Kappert HF; Witkowski S
    Int J Prosthodont; 1995; 8(3):265-72. PubMed ID: 10348596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Load fatigue performance of implant-ceramic abutment combinations.
    Nguyen HQ; Tan KB; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(4):636-46. PubMed ID: 19885403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The influence of veneering porcelain thickness of all-ceramic and metal ceramic crowns on failure resistance after cyclic loading.
    Shirakura A; Lee H; Geminiani A; Ercoli C; Feng C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Feb; 101(2):119-27. PubMed ID: 19167536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fatigue resistance of two implant/abutment joint designs.
    Khraisat A; Stegaroiu R; Nomura S; Miyakawa O
    J Prosthet Dent; 2002 Dec; 88(6):604-10. PubMed ID: 12488853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An in vitro load evaluation of a conical implant system with 2 abutment designs and 3 different retaining-screw alloys.
    Erneklint C; Odman P; Ortengren U; Karlsson S
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(5):733-7. PubMed ID: 17066634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fracture frequency of all-ceramic crowns during dynamic loading in a chewing simulator using different loading and luting protocols.
    Heintze SD; Cavalleri A; Zellweger G; Büchler A; Zappini G
    Dent Mater; 2008 Oct; 24(10):1352-61. PubMed ID: 18433859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Survival rate, fracture strength and failure mode of ceramic implant abutments after chewing simulation.
    Butz F; Heydecke G; Okutan M; Strub JR
    J Oral Rehabil; 2005 Nov; 32(11):838-43. PubMed ID: 16202048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study.
    Foong JK; Judge RB; Palamara JE; Swain MV
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 May; 109(5):304-12. PubMed ID: 23684280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cementable implant crowns composed of cast superstructure frameworks luted to electroformed primary copings: an in vitro retention study.
    Di Felice R; Rappelli G; Camaioni E; Cattani M; Meyer JM; Belser UC
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2007 Feb; 18(1):108-13. PubMed ID: 17224031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fracture force of tooth-tooth- and implant-tooth-supported all-ceramic fixed partial dentures using titanium vs. customised zirconia implant abutments.
    Kolbeck C; Behr M; Rosentritt M; Handel G
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2008 Oct; 19(10):1049-53. PubMed ID: 18707604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fracture resistance of five different metal framework designs for metal-ceramic restorations.
    Ulusoy M; Toksavul S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2002; 15(6):571-4. PubMed ID: 12475164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of implant connection and restoration design (screwed vs. cemented) in reliability and failure modes of anterior crowns.
    Freitas AC; Bonfante EA; Rocha EP; Silva NR; Marotta L; Coelho PG
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2011 Aug; 119(4):323-30. PubMed ID: 21726295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.