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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7550082)

  • 1. The effect of cementing agent and technique on the retention of a CeraOne gold cylinder: a pilot study.
    Koka S; Ewoldsen NO; Dana CL; Beatty MW
    Implant Dent; 1995; 4(1):32-5. PubMed ID: 7550082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Factors influencing retention of a CeraOne gold cylinder.
    Kent DK; Koka S; Banks SB; Beatty MW
    Implant Dent; 1996; 5(2):96-9. PubMed ID: 9081581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Retention of cemented implant-supported restorations.
    Kent DK; Koka S; Froeschle ML
    J Prosthodont; 1997 Sep; 6(3):193-6. PubMed ID: 9497775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of abutment size and luting cement type on the uniaxial retention force of implant-supported crowns.
    Covey DA; Kent DK; St Germain HA; Koka S
    J Prosthet Dent; 2000 Mar; 83(3):344-8. PubMed ID: 10709044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effect of luting agents on the retention and marginal adaptation of the CeraOne implant system.
    Clayton GH; Driscoll CF; Hondrum SO
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1997; 12(5):660-5. PubMed ID: 9337028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of the tensile strength of hexagonal abutments using different cementing agents.
    Wahl C; França FM; Brito RB; Basting RT; Smanio H
    Braz Oral Res; 2008; 22(4):299-304. PubMed ID: 19148383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of different types of temporary cements on the tensile strength and marginal adaptation of crowns on implants.
    Akashia AE; Francischone CE; Tokutsune E; da Silva W
    J Adhes Dent; 2002; 4(4):309-15. PubMed ID: 12666750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Use of luting agents with an implant system: Part I.
    Breeding LC; Dixon DL; Bogacki MT; Tietge JD
    J Prosthet Dent; 1992 Nov; 68(5):737-41. PubMed ID: 1432793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The comparison of provisional luting agents and abutment surface roughness on the retention of provisional implant-supported crowns.
    Kim Y; Yamashita J; Shotwell JL; Chong KH; Wang HL
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Jun; 95(6):450-5. PubMed ID: 16765158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Retentiveness of dental cements used with metallic implant components.
    Squier RS; Agar JR; Duncan JP; Taylor TD
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(6):793-8. PubMed ID: 11769829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Retention strengths of five luting cements on prefabricated dowels after root canal obturation with a zinc oxide/eugenol sealer: 1. Dowel space preparation/cementation at one week after obturation.
    Hagge MS; Wong RD; Lindemuth JS
    J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):168-75. PubMed ID: 12237797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Retention and leakage of implant-supported restorations luted with provisional cement: a pilot study.
    Pan YH; Ramp LC; Lin CK; Liu PR
    J Oral Rehabil; 2007 Mar; 34(3):206-12. PubMed ID: 17302949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of abutment taper, length and cement type on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations.
    Bernal G; Okamura M; Muñoz CA
    J Prosthodont; 2003 Jun; 12(2):111-5. PubMed ID: 12964683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of thermal cycling and air abrasion on cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures.
    Michalakis K; Pissiotis AL; Kang K; Hirayama H; Garefis PD; Petridis H
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(4):569-74. PubMed ID: 17929517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Tensile strength of cementing agents on the CeraOne system of dental prosthesis on implants.
    Montenegro AC; Machado AN; Depes Gouvêa CV
    Implant Dent; 2008 Dec; 17(4):451-60. PubMed ID: 19077583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Retentiveness of various luting agents used with implant-supported prosthesis: an in vitro study.
    Garg P; Pujari M; Prithviraj DR; Khare S
    J Oral Implantol; 2014 Dec; 40(6):649-54. PubMed ID: 25506659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of modifying the screw access channels of zirconia implant abutment on the cement flow pattern and retention of zirconia restorations.
    Wadhwani C; Chung KH
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Jul; 112(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 24680357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of abutment wall height, platform size, and screw access channel filling method on resistance to dislodgement of cement-retained, implant-supported restorations.
    Emms M; Tredwin CJ; Setchell DJ; Moles DR
    J Prosthodont; 2007; 16(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 17244301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Tensile bond strength of cast commercially pure titanium and cast gold-alloy posts and cores cemented with two luting agents.
    Menani LR; Ribeiro RF; Antunes RP
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):141-7. PubMed ID: 18262015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of 3 luting agents on retention of implant-supported crowns on 2 different abutments.
    Güncü MB; Cakan U; Canay S
    Implant Dent; 2011 Oct; 20(5):349-53. PubMed ID: 21811170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.