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 *

698 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29221955)

  • 1. Comparison of external and internal implant-abutment connections for implant supported prostheses. A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Lemos CAA; Verri FR; Bonfante EA; Santiago Júnior JF; Pellizzer EP
    J Dent; 2018 Mar; 70():14-22. PubMed ID: 29221955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of marginal bone loss of dental implants with internal or external connections and its association with other variables: A systematic review.
    de Medeiros RA; Pellizzer EP; Vechiato Filho AJ; Dos Santos DM; da Silva EV; Goiato MC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Oct; 116(4):501-506.e5. PubMed ID: 27422232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The influence of implant-abutment connection to peri-implant bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Caricasulo R; Malchiodi L; Ghensi P; Fantozzi G; Cucchi A
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2018 Aug; 20(4):653-664. PubMed ID: 29761902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of Marginal Bone Loss Between Implants with Internal and External Connections: A Systematic Review.
    Palacios-Garzón N; Mauri-Obradors E; Roselló-LLabrés X; Estrugo-Devesa A; Jané-Salas E; López-López J
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(3):580-589. PubMed ID: 29763496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A systematic review of the influence of the implant-abutment connection on the clinical outcomes of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions.
    Pjetursson BE; Zarauz C; Strasding M; Sailer I; Zwahlen M; Zembic A
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Oct; 29 Suppl 18():160-183. PubMed ID: 30306682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of Connections and Surfaces of Dental Implants on Marginal Bone Loss: A Retrospective Study Over 7 to 19 Years.
    Lee JH; Kim JC; Kim HY; Yeo IL
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2020; 35(6):1195-1202. PubMed ID: 33270060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dental implants with internal versus external connections: 1-year post-loading results from a pragmatic multicenter randomised controlled trial.
    Esposito M; Maghaireh H; Pistilli R; Grusovin MG; Lee ST; Gualini F; Yoo J; Buti J
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2015; 8(4):331-44. PubMed ID: 26669544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of cement-retained versus screw-retained implant-supported restorations for marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Lemos CA; de Souza Batista VE; Almeida DA; Santiago Júnior JF; Verri FR; Pellizzer EP
    J Prosthet Dent; 2016 Apr; 115(4):419-27. PubMed ID: 26589441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Is an internal tapered connection more efficient than an internal nontapered connection? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Yu X; Han Y; Wang J
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Oct; 124(4):431-438. PubMed ID: 31862145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Should the restoration of adjacent implants be splinted or nonsplinted? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    de Souza Batista VE; Verri FR; Lemos CAA; Cruz RS; Oliveira HFF; Gomes JML; Pellizzer EP
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Jan; 121(1):41-51. PubMed ID: 29961632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review.
    Gracis S; Michalakis K; Vigolo P; Vult von Steyern P; Zwahlen M; Sailer I
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Oct; 23 Suppl 6():202-16. PubMed ID: 23062143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Comparison of survival rate and crestal bone loss of narrow diameter dental implants versus regular dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Alrabiah M
    J Investig Clin Dent; 2019 Feb; 10(1):e12367. PubMed ID: 30414262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is the clinical performance of internal conical connection better than internal non-conical connection for implant-supported restorations? A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Rodrigues VVM; Faé DS; Rosa CDDRD; Bento VAA; Lacerda MFLS; Pellizzer EP; Lemos CAA
    J Prosthodont; 2023 Jun; 32(5):382-391. PubMed ID: 36700461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bone and soft tissue outcomes, risk factors, and complications of implant-supported prostheses: 5-Years RCT with different abutment types and loading protocols.
    Göthberg C; Gröndahl K; Omar O; Thomsen P; Slotte C
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2018 Jun; 20(3):313-321. PubMed ID: 29380510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of abutment height on peri-implant marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Chen Z; Lin CY; Li J; Wang HL; Yu H
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 Jul; 122(1):14-21.e2. PubMed ID: 30782461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dental implants with internal versus external connections: 5-year post-loading results from a pragmatic multicenter randomised controlled trial.
    Esposito M; Maghaireh H; Pistilli R; Grusovin MG; Lee ST; Trullenque-Eriksson A; Gualini F
    Eur J Oral Implantol; 2016; 9 Suppl 1(2):129-41. PubMed ID: 27314118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of external, internal flat-to-flat, and conical implant abutment connections for implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
    Camps-Font O; Rubianes-Porta L; Valmaseda-Castellón E; Jung RE; Gay-Escoda C; Figueiredo R
    J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Sep; 130(3):327-340. PubMed ID: 34776267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Does the implant-abutment interface interfere on marginal bone loss? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Rosa EC; Deliberador TM; Nascimento TCLD; Kintopp CCA; Orsi JSR; Wambier LM; Khajotia SS; Esteban Florez FL; Storrer CLM
    Braz Oral Res; 2019; 33(suppl 1):e068. PubMed ID: 31576952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 35.