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.
136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37244792)
1. Retentive force variations in three polyamide and a polyetheretherketone denture attachments for implant-supported overdentures: An in vitro study. Βei M; Kamalakidis SN; Pissiotis AL; Michalakis K; Naka O J Prosthet Dent; 2023 May; ():. PubMed ID: 37244792 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Brushing effect on the retentive force of retentive inserts in three denture attachments: An in vitro study. Kamonkhantikul K; Homsiang W; Arksornnukit M J Prosthet Dent; 2022 Sep; 128(3):487.e1-487.e12. PubMed ID: 35934574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of implant angulation and patrice on the retention of overdenture attachment systems: An in vitro study. Frantz K; Funkenbusch P; Feng C; Tsigarida A; Chochlidakis K; Lo Russo L; Ercoli C J Prosthodont; 2024 Jun; 33(5):452-459. PubMed ID: 37212388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. In vitro measurement of the retention force of two stud attachment systems during cyclic load. Friedrichsen M; Dirksen D; Runte C J Prosthodont; 2024 Feb; 33(2):164-170. PubMed ID: 36779671 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Retention and wear behaviors of two implant overdenture stud-type attachments at different implant angulations. Choi JW; Bae JH; Jeong CM; Huh JB J Prosthet Dent; 2017 May; 117(5):628-635. PubMed ID: 27863857 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Retention loss and wear assessment of three attachment systems for implant retained-mandibular overdentures: An in vitro study. Wakam R; Ramalingam S; Mawussi KB; Gorin C; Benoit A J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2024 Feb; 150():106269. PubMed ID: 38043259 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The in vitro effect of different implant angulations and cyclic dislodgement on the retentive properties of an overdenture attachment system. Al-Ghafli SA; Michalakis KX; Hirayama H; Kang K J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Sep; 102(3):140-7. PubMed ID: 19703620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. In vitro comparison of the retentive properties of ball and locator attachments for implant overdentures. Türk PE; Geckili O; Türk Y; Günay V; Bilgin T Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(5):1106-13. PubMed ID: 25216136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of in vitro cyclic dislodging on retentive force and removal torque of three overdenture attachment systems. Kobayashi M; Srinivasan M; Ammann P; Perriard J; Ohkubo C; Müller F; Belser UC; Schimmel M Clin Oral Implants Res; 2014 Apr; 25(4):426-34. PubMed ID: 23566266 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Retentive force variations of stud attachments for implant overdentures. Boulos PJ; Akiki LA; Makzoumé JE; Fakhoury J; Tohmé H; El Hage FS Gen Dent; 2018; 66(4):41-45. PubMed ID: 29964247 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Retention and wear of resin matrix attachments for implant overdentures. Wichmann N; Kern M; Taylor T; Wille S; Passia N J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2020 Oct; 110():103901. PubMed ID: 32957206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of inter-implant distance influence on the wear characteristics of low-profile stud attachments used in mandibular implant‑retained overdentures. El Mekawy N; Elhawary MY J Clin Exp Dent; 2019 Jan; 11(1):e33-e41. PubMed ID: 30697392 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Maximum dislodging forces of implant overdenture stud attachments. Petropoulos VC; Smith W Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(4):526-35. PubMed ID: 12182295 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Retentive force and dislodgment time variations between three implant overdenture stud attachments in an acidic environment: An in-vitro pilot study. Farhat M; Daher T; Hajjar JJ; Boulos PJ Saudi Dent J; 2024 Feb; 36(2):368-373. PubMed ID: 38419987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Retention forces of spherical attachments as a function of implant and matrix angulation in mandibular overdentures: an in vitro study. Ortegón SM; Thompson GA; Agar JR; Taylor TD; Perdikis D J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Apr; 101(4):231-8. PubMed ID: 19328276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of retention and stability of two implant-retained overdentures based on implant location. Scherer MD; McGlumphy EA; Seghi RR; Campagni WV J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Sep; 112(3):515-21. PubMed ID: 24819528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital wear analysis and retention of poly-ether-ether-ketone retentive inserts versus conventional nylon inserts in locator retained mandibular overdentures: in-vitro study. Fayed MS; Elsherbini NN; Mohsen B; Osman R Clin Oral Investig; 2024 Aug; 28(9):468. PubMed ID: 39105859 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Retention of mandibular implant-retained overdentures with two different attachment designs: An in vitro study. Ramadan RE; Mohamed FS J Prosthet Dent; 2020 May; 123(5):738.e1-738.e6. PubMed ID: 32165012 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of retention and strain energies of stud attachments for implant overdentures. Petropoulos VC; Mante FK J Prosthodont; 2011 Jun; 20(4):286-93. PubMed ID: 21539646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]