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 *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23712346)

  • 1. Surgical and prosthetic considerations on dental implants as tooth substitutes.
    Wachtel H
    Eur J Esthet Dent; 2013; 8(2):278. PubMed ID: 23712346
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Prosthetic and biomechanical factors affecting bone remodeling around implants.
    Gracis S
    Eur J Esthet Dent; 2013; 8(2):314-33. PubMed ID: 23712348
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Factors influencing marginal tissue remodeling around implants.
    Rompen E; Touati B; Van Dooren E
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2003; 15(10):754-7, 759, 761. PubMed ID: 14969212
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Marginal bone level changes and prosthetic maintenance of mandibular overdentures supported by 2 implants: a 5-year randomized clinical trial.
    Cehreli MC; Uysal S; Akca K
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2010 Jun; 12(2):114-21. PubMed ID: 19220845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. AICRG, Part II: Crestal bone loss associated with the Ankylos implant: loading to 36 months.
    Chou CT; Morris HF; Ochi S; Walker L; DesRosiers D
    J Oral Implantol; 2004; 30(3):134-43. PubMed ID: 15255390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The soft tissue response to osseointegrated dental implants.
    Weber HP; Cochran DL
    J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Jan; 79(1):79-89. PubMed ID: 9474546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The influence of non-matching implant and abutment diameters on radiographic crestal bone levels in dogs.
    Jung RE; Jones AA; Higginbottom FL; Wilson TG; Schoolfield J; Buser D; Hämmerle CH; Cochran DL
    J Periodontol; 2008 Feb; 79(2):260-70. PubMed ID: 18251640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical evaluation of a prospective multicenter study on 1-piece implants. part 1: marginal bone level evaluation after 1 year of follow-up.
    Finne K; Rompen E; Toljanic J
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(2):226-34. PubMed ID: 17465347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A randomized controlled clinical trial to assess crestal bone remodeling of four different implant designs.
    Glibert M; Vervaeke S; Jacquet W; Vermeersch K; Östman PO; De Bruyn H
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2018 Aug; 20(4):455-462. PubMed ID: 29575488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Peri-implant bone loss as a function of tooth-implant distance.
    Baron M; Haas R; Baron W; Mailath-Pokorny G
    Int J Prosthodont; 2005; 18(5):427-33. PubMed ID: 16220810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Nonremoval of immediate abutments in cases involving subcrestally placed postextractive tapered single implants: a randomized controlled clinical study.
    Degidi M; Nardi D; Daprile G; Piattelli A
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2014 Dec; 16(6):794-805. PubMed ID: 23458566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bone level dental implant versus gingival crest level implant.
    Fernandes A
    Dent Today; 2011 Jun; 30(6):72-3. PubMed ID: 21761630
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Surgical, biologic and implant-related factors affecting bone remodeling around implants.
    Capelli M
    Eur J Esthet Dent; 2013; 8(2):279-313. PubMed ID: 23712347
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Peri-implant marginal bone level: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing platform switching versus conventionally restored implants.
    Annibali S; Bignozzi I; Cristalli MP; Graziani F; La Monaca G; Polimeni A
    J Clin Periodontol; 2012 Nov; 39(11):1097-113. PubMed ID: 22931292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bone response to loaded implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters in the canine mandible.
    Cochran DL; Bosshardt DD; Grize L; Higginbottom FL; Jones AA; Jung RE; Wieland M; Dard M
    J Periodontol; 2009 Apr; 80(4):609-17. PubMed ID: 19335081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone levels in non-submerged dental implants: a radiographic study in the canine mandible.
    King GN; Hermann JS; Schoolfield JD; Buser D; Cochran DL
    J Periodontol; 2002 Oct; 73(10):1111-7. PubMed ID: 12416767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bone alterations at implant-supported FDPs in relation to inter-unit distances: a 5-year radiographic study.
    Chang M; Wennström JL
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2010 Jul; 21(7):735-40. PubMed ID: 20384704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A prosthetic alternative for severely angled implants beneath a maxillary overdenture: a clinical report.
    Rilo B; Fernández-Formoso N; Dasilva L; Santana U
    J Prosthodont; 2013 Apr; 22(3):214-6. PubMed ID: 22984841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of thin mucosal tissues on crestal bone stability around implants with platform switching: a 1-year pilot study.
    Linkevicius T; Apse P; Grybauskas S; Puisys A
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Sep; 68(9):2272-7. PubMed ID: 20605308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Factors associated with early and late failure of dental implants.
    Sakka S; Baroudi K; Nassani MZ
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2012 Nov; 3(4):258-61. PubMed ID: 22927130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.