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 *

180 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17559619)

  • 1. Cross-sectional analysis of the implant-abutment interface.
    Coelho AL; Suzuki M; Dibart S; DA Silva N; Coelho PG
    J Oral Rehabil; 2007 Jul; 34(7):508-16. PubMed ID: 17559619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Examination of the implant-abutment interface after fatigue testing.
    Cibirka RM; Nelson SK; Lang BR; Rueggeberg FA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Mar; 85(3):268-75. PubMed ID: 11264934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the precision of fit between the Procera custom abutment and various implant systems.
    Lang LA; Sierraalta M; Hoffensperger M; Wang RF
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(5):652-8. PubMed ID: 14579952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Critical bending moment of implant-abutment screw joint interfaces: effect of torque levels and implant diameter.
    Tan BF; Tan KB; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(5):648-58. PubMed ID: 15508980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The dynamic natures of implant loading.
    Wang RF; Kang B; Lang LA; Razzoog ME
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Jun; 101(6):359-71. PubMed ID: 19463663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Measurement of the rotational misfit and implant-abutment gap of all-ceramic abutments.
    Garine WN; Funkenbusch PD; Ercoli C; Wodenscheck J; Murphy WC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(6):928-38. PubMed ID: 18271374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A classification system to measure the implant-abutment microgap.
    Kano SC; Binon PP; Curtis DA
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(6):879-85. PubMed ID: 18271368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of the ITI Morse taper implant/abutment design with an internal modification.
    Ding TA; Woody RD; Higginbottom FL; Miller BH
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(6):865-72. PubMed ID: 14696662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Variation in the total lengths of abutment/implant assemblies generated with a function of applied tightening torque in external and internal implant-abutment connection.
    Kim KS; Lim YJ; Kim MJ; Kwon HB; Yang JH; Lee JB; Yim SH
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2011 Aug; 22(8):834-9. PubMed ID: 21198900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Abutment rotational displacement of external hexagon implant system under lateral cyclic loading.
    Khraisat A; Baqain ZH; Smadi L; Nomura S; Miyakawa O; Elnasser Z
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2006; 8(2):96-9. PubMed ID: 16774595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Load fatigue performance of four implant-abutment interface designs: effect of torque level and implant system.
    Quek HC; Tan KB; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(2):253-62. PubMed ID: 18548921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Radiographical evaluation of the gap at the implant-abutment interface.
    Papavassiliou H; Kourtis S; Katerelou J; Chronopoulos V
    J Esthet Restor Dent; 2010 Aug; 22(4):235-50. PubMed ID: 20690952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cyclic loading of implant-supported prostheses: comparison of gaps at the prosthetic-abutment interface when cycled abutments are replaced with as-manufactured abutments.
    Hecker DM; Eckert SE; Choi YG
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Jan; 95(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 16399272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Marginal accuracy of three implant-ceramic abutment configurations.
    Baldassarri M; Hjerppe J; Romeo D; Fickl S; Thompson VP; Stappert CF
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):537-43. PubMed ID: 22616046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Biomechanical aspects of bone-level diameter shifting at implant-abutment interface.
    Canay S; Akça K
    Implant Dent; 2009 Jun; 18(3):239-48. PubMed ID: 19509534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of fit accuracy between Procera custom abutments and three implant systems.
    Alves da Cunha Tde M; Correia de Araújo RP; Barbosa da Rocha PV; Pazos Amoedo RM
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Oct; 14(5):772-7. PubMed ID: 20977612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Probabilistic analysis of preload in the abutment screw of a dental implant complex.
    Guda T; Ross TA; Lang LA; Millwater HR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Sep; 100(3):183-93. PubMed ID: 18762030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of fit accuracy between Procera® custom abutments and three implant systems.
    de Morais Alves da Cunha T; de Araújo RP; da Rocha PV; Amoedo RM
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Dec; 14(6):890-5. PubMed ID: 21176100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.