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 *

215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26085188)

  • 41. Retentive characteristics of a vinylpolysiloxane overdenture attachment system.
    Schweyen R; Beuer F; Arnold C; Hey J
    Clin Oral Investig; 2015 May; 19(4):947-53. PubMed ID: 25146180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Effects of interimplant distance and cyclic dislodgement on retention of LOCATOR and ball attachments: An in vitro study.
    Salehi R; Shayegh SS; Johnston WM; Hakimaneh SMR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Dec; 122(6):550-556. PubMed ID: 31027962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. In Vitro Effect of Mastication on the Retention and Wear of Locator Attachments in a Flat Mandibular Ridge Model.
    Tehini G; Baba NZ; Majzoub Z; Nahas P; Berberi A; Rifai K
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e744-e751. PubMed ID: 29968276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Impact of implants number and attachment type on the peri-implant stresses and retention of palateless implant-retained overdenture.
    Hegazy SA; El Mekawy N; Emera RMK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2020; 31(3):414-419. PubMed ID: 32769276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The influence of interimplant divergence on the retention characteristics of locator attachments, a laboratory study.
    Stephens GJ; di Vitale N; O'Sullivan E; McDonald A
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Aug; 23(6):467-75. PubMed ID: 24750293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The change in retentive values of locator attachments and hader clips over time.
    Evtimovska E; Masri R; Driscoll CF; Romberg E
    J Prosthodont; 2009 Aug; 18(6):479-83. PubMed ID: 19500236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. Effect of Simulated Mastication on the Retention of Locator Attachments for Implant-Supported Overdentures: An In Vitro Pilot Study.
    Tehini G; Baba NZ; Berberi A; Majzoub Z; Bassal H; Rifai K
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Jan; 29(1):74-79. PubMed ID: 28913855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Effect of Labial Implant Inclination on the Retention and Stability of Different Resilient Stud Attachments for Mandibular Implant Overdentures: An In vitro Study.
    ELsyad MA; Emera RM; Ibrahim AM
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2019; 34(2):381–389. PubMed ID: 30703183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Retention characteristics of attachment systems for implant overdentures.
    Chung KH; Chung CY; Cagna DR; Cronin RJ
    J Prosthodont; 2004 Dec; 13(4):221-6. PubMed ID: 15610542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. The service life of implant-retained overdenture attachment systems.
    Pigozzo MN; Mesquita MF; Henriques GE; Vaz LG
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Aug; 102(2):74-80. PubMed ID: 19643220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Maximum dislodging forces of mandibular implant-assisted removable partial dentures: in vitro assessment.
    Gharehchahi J; Asadzadeh N; Mirmortazavi A; Shakeri MT
    J Prosthodont; 2013 Oct; 22(7):543-549. PubMed ID: 23551954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Retention of maxillary implant overdenture bars of different designs.
    Williams BH; Ochiai KT; Hojo S; Nishimura R; Caputo AA
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Dec; 86(6):603-7. PubMed ID: 11753311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. 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]  

  • 55. Resilient Stud Versus Bar Attachments for Inclined Implants Supporting Mandibular Overdentures. An In Vitro Study of Loading and Dislodging Strains.
    Elhelbawy NG; ELsyad MA; Soliman TA; Mahrous A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2022; 37(5):982-988. PubMed ID: 36170313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Wear simulation effects on overdenture stud attachments.
    Rutkunas V; Mizutani H; Takahashi H; Iwasaki N
    Dent Mater J; 2011; 30(6):845-53. PubMed ID: 22123008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Retention of Different Attachment Systems for Digitally Designed Mandibular Implant Overdenture.
    Abdelaziz MS; Fawzy AM; Ghali RM; Nassar HI
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Feb; 32(2):162-169. PubMed ID: 35344237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. A comparative in vitro study on the retention and stability of implant-supported overdentures.
    Sadig W
    Quintessence Int; 2009 Apr; 40(4):313-9. PubMed ID: 19417876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Effect of simulated masticatory loading on the retention of stud attachments for implant overdentures.
    Abi Nader S; de Souza RF; Fortin D; De Koninck L; Fromentin O; Albuquerque Junior RF
    J Oral Rehabil; 2011 Mar; 38(3):157-64. PubMed ID: 20819139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Effect of the number of supporting implants on mandibular photoelastic models with different implant-retained overdenture designs.
    Celik G; Uludag B
    J Prosthodont; 2014 Jul; 23(5):374-80. PubMed ID: 24417330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.