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 *

1800 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19885403)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. In vitro study of the influence of the type of connection on the fracture load of zirconia abutments with internal and external implant-abutment connections.
    Sailer I; Sailer T; Stawarczyk B; Jung RE; Hämmerle CH
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(5):850-8. PubMed ID: 19865625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Load fatigue performance of conical implant-abutment connections.
    Seetoh YL; Tan KB; Chua EK; Quek HC; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):797-806. PubMed ID: 21841990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 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. In vitro assessment of three types of zirconia implant abutments under static load.
    Kim JS; Raigrodski AJ; Flinn BD; Rubenstein JE; Chung KH; Mancl LA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Apr; 109(4):255-63. PubMed ID: 23566607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Load fatigue performance of two implant-abutment combinations.
    Basten CH; Nicholls JI; Daly CH; Taggart R
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1996; 11(4):522-8. PubMed ID: 8803348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Load fatigue performance of a single-tooth implant abutment system: effect of diameter.
    Quek CE; Tan KB; Nicholls JI
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(6):929-36. PubMed ID: 17190303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of fracture resistance of pressable metal ceramic custom implant abutment with a commercially fabricated CAD/CAM zirconia implant abutment.
    Protopapadaki M; Monaco EA; Kim HI; Davis EL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):389-96. PubMed ID: 24011801
    [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. 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]  

  • 18. Comparison of fracture resistance of pressable metal ceramic custom implant abutments with CAD/CAM commercially fabricated zirconia implant abutments.
    Kim S; Kim HI; Brewer JD; Monaco EA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Apr; 101(4):226-30. PubMed ID: 19328275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An in vitro evaluation of titanium, zirconia, and alumina procera abutments with hexagonal connection.
    Vigolo P; Fonzi F; Majzoub Z; Cordioli G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(4):575-80. PubMed ID: 16955608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Implant abutment screw rotations and preloads for four different screw materials and surfaces.
    Martin WC; Woody RD; Miller BH; Miller AW
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jul; 86(1):24-32. PubMed ID: 11458261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 90.