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 *

2300 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16765158)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Cement selection for implant-supported crowns fabricated with different luting space settings.
    Gultekin P; Gultekin BA; Aydin M; Yalcin S
    J Prosthodont; 2013 Feb; 22(2):112-9. PubMed ID: 23387964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Influence of abutment height and surface roughness on in vitro retention of three luting agents.
    Cano-Batalla J; Soliva-Garriga J; Campillo-Funollet M; Munoz-Viveros CA; Giner-Tarrida L
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(1):36-41. PubMed ID: 22299076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures.
    Michalakis K; Pissiotis AL; Kang K; Hirayama H; Garefis PD; Petridis H
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(4):569-74. PubMed ID: 17929517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of a fluoride varnish on the margin leakage and retention of luted provisional crowns.
    Lewinstein I; Fuhrer N; Ganor Y
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Jan; 89(1):70-5. PubMed ID: 12589290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Retention of CAD/CAM all-ceramic crowns on prefabricated implant abutments: an in vitro comparative study of luting agents and abutment surface area.
    Carnaggio TV; Conrad R; Engelmeier RL; Gerngross P; Paravina R; Perezous L; Powers JM
    J Prosthodont; 2012 Oct; 21(7):523-8. PubMed ID: 22469271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Retention of zirconium oxide ceramic crowns with three types of cement.
    Palacios RP; Johnson GH; Phillips KM; Raigrodski AJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Aug; 96(2):104-14. PubMed ID: 16911887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of two fit-indicating materials and various subsequent cleaning methods on the retention of simulated crowns.
    Hammad IA; Al Amri M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Jan; 99(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 18182185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of surface treatment of titanium posts on the tensile bond strength.
    Schmage P; Sohn J; Ozcan M; Nergiz I
    Dent Mater; 2006 Feb; 22(2):189-94. PubMed ID: 16039707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of titanium dowel retention using four different luting agents.
    Balbosh A; Ludwig K; Kern M
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Sep; 94(3):227-33. PubMed ID: 16126075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of 3 luting agents on retention of implant-supported crowns on 2 different abutments.
    Güncü MB; Cakan U; Canay S
    Implant Dent; 2011 Oct; 20(5):349-53. PubMed ID: 21811170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of air abrasion of metal implant abutments on the tensile bond strength of three luting agents used to cement implant superstructures: an in vitro study.
    Jugdev J; Borzabadi-Farahani A; Lynch E
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):784-90. PubMed ID: 25032757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations.
    Bernal G; Okamura M; Muñoz CA
    J Prosthodont; 2003 Jun; 12(2):111-5. PubMed ID: 12964683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Retention of zirconia copings on zirconia implant abutments cemented with provisional luting agents.
    Kokubo Y; Kano T; Tsumita M; Sakurai S; Itayama A; Fukushima S
    J Oral Rehabil; 2010 Jan; 37(1):48-53. PubMed ID: 19849775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An in vitro assessment of circumferential grooves on the retention of cement-retained implant-supported crowns.
    Lewinstein I; Block L; Lehr Z; Ormianer Z; Matalon S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2011 Dec; 106(6):367-72. PubMed ID: 22133393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Retention of implant-supported zirconium oxide ceramic restorations using different luting agents.
    Nejatidanesh F; Savabi O; Shahtoosi M
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2013 Aug; 24 Suppl A100():20-4. PubMed ID: 22092303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of surface conditioning on the retentiveness of titanium crowns over short implant abutments.
    Sadig WM; Al Harbi MW
    Implant Dent; 2007 Dec; 16(4):387-96. PubMed ID: 18091167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of fatigue damage on the force required to remove a restoration in a cement-retained implant system.
    Kaar D; Oshida Y; Andres CJ; Barco MT; Platt JA
    J Prosthodont; 2006; 15(5):289-94. PubMed ID: 16958729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of uniaxial resistance forces of cements used with implant-supported crowns.
    Akça K; Iplikçioğlu H; Cehreli MC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(4):536-42. PubMed ID: 12182296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Retention of cast crown copings cemented to implant abutments.
    Dudley JE; Richards LC; Abbott JR
    Aust Dent J; 2008 Dec; 53(4):332-9. PubMed ID: 19133949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 115.