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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21519577)

  • 1. Wear of ball attachments after 1 to 8 years of clinical use: a qualitative analysis.
    Fromentin O; Lassauzay C; Nader SA; Feine J; de Albuquerque RF
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(3):270-2. PubMed ID: 21519577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Wear of ceramic and titanium ball attachments in subjects with an implant-retained overdenture: a controlled clinical trial.
    Büttel AE; Lüthy H; Sendi P; Marinello CP
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Feb; 107(2):109-13. PubMed ID: 22304745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Clinical performance and material properties of single-implant overdenture attachment systems.
    Alsabeeha NH; Swain MV; Payne AG
    Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(3):247-54. PubMed ID: 21519573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative study of four retentive anchor systems for implant supported overdentures--retention force changes.
    Bayer S; Steinheuser D; Grüner M; Keilig L; Enkling N; Stark H; Mues S
    Gerodontology; 2009 Dec; 26(4):268-72. PubMed ID: 19371390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Wear of matrix overdenture attachments after one to eight years of clinical use.
    Fromentin O; Lassauzay C; Nader SA; Feine J; de Albuquerque RF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Mar; 107(3):191-8. PubMed ID: 22385696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical wear of overdenture ball attachments after 1, 3 and 8 years.
    Fromentin O; Lassauzay C; Nader SA; Feine J; de Albuquerque RF
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2011 Nov; 22(11):1270-4. PubMed ID: 21985283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A randomized clinical trial comparing two mandibular implant overdenture designs: 3-year prosthetic outcomes using a six-field protocol.
    Walton JN
    Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(3):255-60. PubMed ID: 12854788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Resistance to wear of four matrices with ball attachments for implant overdentures: a fatigue study.
    Branchi R; Vangi D; Virga A; Guertin G; Fazi G
    J Prosthodont; 2010 Dec; 19(8):614-9. PubMed ID: 20546492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Retention forces of spherical attachments as a function of implant and matrix angulation in mandibular overdentures: an in vitro study.
    Ortegón SM; Thompson GA; Agar JR; Taylor TD; Perdikis D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Apr; 101(4):231-8. PubMed ID: 19328276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A clinical trial of patient satisfaction and prosthodontic needs with ball and bar attachments for implant-retained complete overdentures: three-year results.
    MacEntee MI; Walton JN; Glick N
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Jan; 93(1):28-37. PubMed ID: 15623995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Attachment systems for mandibular single-implant overdentures: an in vitro retention force investigation on different designs.
    Alsabeeha N; Atieh M; Swain MV; Payne AG
    Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(2):160-6. PubMed ID: 20305857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of the retentive characteristics of semi-precision extracoronal attachments.
    Hedzelek W; Rzatowski S; Czarnecka B
    J Oral Rehabil; 2011 Jun; 38(6):462-8. PubMed ID: 20846216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of retention and strain energies of stud attachments for implant overdentures.
    Petropoulos VC; Mante FK
    J Prosthodont; 2011 Jun; 20(4):286-93. PubMed ID: 21539646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. In vitro comparison of the retentive properties of ball and locator attachments for implant overdentures.
    Türk PE; Geckili O; Türk Y; Günay V; Bilgin T
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(5):1106-13. PubMed ID: 25216136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Implant-supported mandibular overdentures retained with ball or telescopic crown attachments: a 3-year prospective study.
    Krennmair G; Weinländer M; Krainhöfner M; Piehslinger E
    Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(2):164-70. PubMed ID: 16602365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of implant angulation upon retention of overdenture attachments.
    Gulizio MP; Agar JR; Kelly JR; Taylor TD
    J Prosthodont; 2005 Mar; 14(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 15733129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [First clinical experiences with ceramic ball attachments for overdentures].
    Büttel AE; Schmidli F; Marinello CP; Lüthy H
    Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed; 2008; 118(1):27-35. PubMed ID: 18293602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Trend of change in retentive force for bar attachments with different materials.
    Saito M; Kanazawa M; Takahashi H; Uo M; Minakuchi S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Dec; 112(6):1545-52. PubMed ID: 25023010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Scanning electron microscopy observations of failures of implant overdenture bars: a case series report.
    Waddell JN; Payne AG; Swain MV; Kieser JA
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2010 Mar; 12(1):26-38. PubMed ID: 20148915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. In vitro wear of different material combinations of intracoronal precision attachments.
    Holst S; Blatz MB; Eitner S; Wichmann M
    Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(4):330-2. PubMed ID: 16900814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.