178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36511053)
1. Evaluation and comparison of vertical marginal fit of three different types of multiunit screw-retained framework fabricated for an implant-supported prosthesis - An
Singh M; Yadav BK; Phukela SS; Ritwal P; Nagpal A; Saluja P
J Indian Prosthodont Soc; 2022; 22(3):240-248. PubMed ID: 36511053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. In vitro fit of CAD-CAM complete arch screw-retained titanium and zirconia implant prostheses fabricated on 4 implants.
Al-Meraikhi H; Yilmaz B; McGlumphy E; Brantley W; Johnston WM
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Mar; 119(3):409-416. PubMed ID: 28720339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Marginal discrepancy of CAD-CAM complete-arch fixed implant-supported frameworks.
Yilmaz B; Kale E; Johnston WM
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Jul; 120(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 29475755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Effect of manufacturing techniques on the marginal and internal fit of cobalt-chromium implant-supported multiunit frameworks.
Akçin ET; Güncü MB; Aktaş G; Aslan Y
J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Nov; 120(5):715-720. PubMed ID: 30017153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. An assessment of the passivity of the fit of multiunit screw-retained implant frameworks manufactured by using additive and subtractive technologies.
Abu Ghofa A; Önöral Ö
J Prosthet Dent; 2023 Mar; 129(3):440-446. PubMed ID: 34294420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Marginal and internal fit of CAD/CAM frameworks in multiple implant-supported restorations: Scanning and milling error analysis.
Uribarri A; Bilbao-Uriarte E; Segurola A; Ugarte D; Verdugo F
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2019 Oct; 21(5):1062-1072. PubMed ID: 31454146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mechanical performance of cement- and screw-retained all-ceramic single crowns on dental implants.
Obermeier M; Ristow O; Erdelt K; Beuer F
Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Mar; 22(2):981-991. PubMed ID: 28710653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Precision Fit of Screw-Retained Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses Fabricated by CAD/CAM, Copy-Milling, and Conventional Methods.
de França DG; Morais MH; das Neves FD; Carreiro AF; Barbosa GA
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2017; 32(3):507–513. PubMed ID: 27706265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The Effect of Milling Metal Versus Milling Wax on Implant Framework Retention and Adaptation.
Ghodsi S; Pirmoazen S; Beyabanaki E; Rostami M; Alikhasi M
J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e739-e743. PubMed ID: 29855135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Hot isostatic pressing as an alternative thermo-mechanical treatment for metallic full-arch implant-supported frameworks obtained by additive and subtractive manufacturing technology: Vertical and horizontal fit, screw removal torque, and stress analysis.
Barbin T; Borges GA; Jardini AL; Mesquita MF
J Prosthodont; 2024 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38513224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An in vitro study using confocal laser scanning microscopy to evaluate the marginal misfits of different implant-supported frameworks.
Tonin BSH; Fu J; Peixoto RF; Fischer NG; Fernandes RM; Curylofo PA; de Mattos MDGC; Macedo AP; de Almeida RP
J Prosthodont; 2024 Feb; ():. PubMed ID: 38305664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Marginal and internal fit of curved anterior CAD/CAM-milled zirconia fixed dental prostheses: an in-vitro study.
Büchi DL; Ebler S; Hämmerle CH; Sailer I
Quintessence Int; 2014; 45(10):837-46. PubMed ID: 25126636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of the Marginal and Internal Fit of Implant-Supported Metal Copings Fabricated with 3 Different Techniques: An In Vitro Study.
Yildirim B; Paken G
J Prosthodont; 2019 Mar; 28(3):315-320. PubMed ID: 30667169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 3D metal printing in dentistry: An in vitro biomechanical comparative study of two additive manufacturing technologies for full-arch implant-supported prostheses.
Barbin T; Velôso DV; Del Rio Silva L; Borges GA; Presotto AGC; Barão VAR; Mesquita MF
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2020 Aug; 108():103821. PubMed ID: 32469723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
