191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22670250)
1. Effect of intraoral scanning on the passivity of fit of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses.
Karl M; Graef F; Schubinski P; Taylor T
Quintessence Int; 2012; 43(7):555-62. PubMed ID: 22670250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of material selection on the passivity of fit of implant-supported restorations created with computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture.
Karl M; Taylor TD
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):739-45. PubMed ID: 21841982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Passivity of fit of CAD/CAM and copy-milled frameworks, veneered frameworks, and anatomically contoured, zirconia ceramic, implant-supported fixed prostheses.
Karl M; Graef F; Wichmann M; Krafft T
J Prosthet Dent; 2012 Apr; 107(4):232-8. PubMed ID: 22475466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Marginal fit and photoelastic stress analysis of CAD-CAM and overcast 3-unit implant-supported frameworks.
Presotto AG; Bhering CL; Mesquita MF; Barão VA
J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Mar; 117(3):373-379. PubMed ID: 27666497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses.
de França DG; Morais MH; das Neves FD; Barbosa GA
J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Jan; 113(1):22-8. PubMed ID: 25277028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with CAD/CAM-fabricated porcelain crown and zirconia-based framework.
Takaba M; Tanaka S; Ishiura Y; Baba K
J Prosthodont; 2013 Jul; 22(5):402-7. PubMed ID: 23289495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Microfractures in metal-ceramic and all-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses caused by superstructure fixation.
Karl M; Graef F; Wichmann M; Beck N
Dent Mater J; 2012; 31(3):338-45. PubMed ID: 22673463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Strain development of implant-supported fixed prostheses copy milled from zirconia ceramic.
Karl M; Graef F; Wichmann M
Int J Prosthodont; 2011; 24(5):479-81. PubMed ID: 21909492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Effect of materials and superstructure designs on the passive fit of implant-supported fixed prostheses].
Song S; Zheng Z; Yang LY; Gao X
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Feb; 37(1):37-41. PubMed ID: 30854816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of feldspathic porcelain layering on the marginal fit of zirconia and titanium complete-arch fixed implant-supported frameworks.
Yilmaz B; Alshahrani FA; Kale E; Johnston WM
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jul; 120(1):71-78. PubMed ID: 29426786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial.
Ahrberg D; Lauer HC; Ahrberg M; Weigl P
Clin Oral Investig; 2016 Mar; 20(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 26070435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Different implant impression techniques for edentulous patients treated with CAD/CAM complete-arch prostheses: a randomised controlled trial reporting data at 3 year post-loading.
Pozzi A; Tallarico M; Mangani F; Barlattani A
Eur J Oral Implantol; 2013; 6(4):325-40. PubMed ID: 24570979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression.
Su TS; Sun J
J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Sep; 116(3):362-7. PubMed ID: 27061628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained 10-unit computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: an in vitro study.
Katsoulis J; Mericske-Stern R; Rotkina L; Zbären C; Enkling N; Blatz MB
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2014 Feb; 25(2):165-74. PubMed ID: 23025489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of the marginal vertical discrepancies of zirconium and metal ceramic posterior fixed dental prostheses before and after cementation.
Gonzalo E; Suárez MJ; Serrano B; Lozano JF
J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Dec; 102(6):378-84. PubMed ID: 19961996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. In vitro precision of fit of computer-aided designed and computer-aided manufactured titanium screw-retained fixed dental prostheses before and after ceramic veneering.
Katsoulis J; Mericske-Stern R; Enkling N; Katsoulis K; Blatz MB
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2015; 26(1):44-9. PubMed ID: 24289301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. CAD/CAM fabrication accuracy of long- vs. short-span implant-supported FDPs.
Katsoulis J; Müller P; Mericske-Stern R; Blatz MB
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2015 Mar; 26(3):245-9. PubMed ID: 25363301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Strain development of screw-retained implant-supported fixed restorations: procera implant bridge versus conventionally cast restorations.
Karl M; Holst S
Int J Prosthodont; 2012; 25(2):166-9. PubMed ID: 22371839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Marginal fit of implant-supported all-ceramic zirconia frameworks.
Zaghloul HH; Younis JF
J Oral Implantol; 2013 Aug; 39(4):417-24. PubMed ID: 23964776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of press-on-metal and conventional ceramic systems for three- and four-unit implant-supported partial fixed dental prostheses: An in vitro study.
Bayramoğlu E; Özkan YK; Yildiz C
J Prosthet Dent; 2015 Jul; 114(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 25858218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
