126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38640839)
1. To what extent can mastication functionality be restored following mandibular reconstruction surgery? A computer modeling approach.
Aftabi H; Sagl B; Lloyd JE; Prisman E; Hodgson A; Fels S
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2024 Jun; 250():108174. PubMed ID: 38640839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computational models and their applications in biomechanical analysis of mandibular reconstruction surgery.
Aftabi H; Zaraska K; Eghbal A; McGregor S; Prisman E; Hodgson A; Fels S
Comput Biol Med; 2024 Feb; 169():107887. PubMed ID: 38160502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A comparison of simulated jaw dynamics in models of segmental mandibular resection versus resection with alloplastic reconstruction.
Hannam AG; Stavness IK; Lloyd JE; Fels SS; Miller AJ; Curtis DA
J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Sep; 104(3):191-8. PubMed ID: 20813233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Modeling of jaw biomechanics in the reconstructed mandibulectomy patient.
Curtis DA; Plesh O; Hannam AG; Sharma A; Curtis TA
J Prosthet Dent; 1999 Feb; 81(2):167-73. PubMed ID: 9922429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Prediction of jaw opening function after mandibular reconstruction using subject-specific musculoskeletal modelling.
Chen J; Wang J; Guo J; Wang X; Kang Y; Wang Y; Guo C
J Oral Rehabil; 2024 Jun; 51(6):1050-1060. PubMed ID: 38544336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mandibular kinematics and maximum voluntary bite force following segmental resection of the mandible without or with reconstruction.
Linsen SS; Oikonomou A; Martini M; Teschke M
Clin Oral Investig; 2018 May; 22(4):1707-1716. PubMed ID: 29116495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The comparison between various methods of mandibular reconstruction based on finite element analysis.
Parvan M; Khaghaninejad MS; Karimi MT
Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2024 Apr; 238(4):423-429. PubMed ID: 38415325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Investigation on masticatory muscular functionality following oral reconstruction - An inverse identification approach.
Zheng K; Liao Z; Yoda N; Fang J; Chen J; Zhang Z; Zhong J; Peck C; Sasaki K; Swain MV; Li Q
J Biomech; 2019 Jun; 90():1-8. PubMed ID: 31079877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Analysis of the effects of mandibular reconstruction based on microvascular free flaps after oncological resections in 21 patients, using 3D planning, surgical templates and individual implants.
Dowgierd K; Pokrowiecki R; Wolanski W; Kawlewska E; Kozakiewicz M; Wos J; Dowgierd M; Krakowczyk Ł
Oral Oncol; 2022 Apr; 127():105800. PubMed ID: 35255279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Masticatory efficiency of implant-supported removable partial dental prostheses in patients with free fibula flap reconstructed mandibles: A split-mouth, observational study.
Kumar VV; Srinivasan M
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018 Aug; 29(8):855-863. PubMed ID: 29920778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical behavior of mandibles reconstructed with fibular grafts at different vertical positions using finite element method.
Cheng KJ; Liu YF; Wang JH; Jun JC; Jiang XF; Wang R; Baur DA
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg; 2019 Feb; 72(2):281-289. PubMed ID: 30482534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analysis of simulated mandibular reconstruction using a segmental mirroring technique.
Davies JC; Chan HHL; Jozaghi Y; Goldstein DP; Irish JC
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2019 Mar; 47(3):468-472. PubMed ID: 30661926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanical evaluation of implant placement in the reconstructed mandible.
Nagasao T; Miyamoto J; Kawana H
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(6):999-1005. PubMed ID: 20162103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Adaquate fixation of plates for stability during mandibular reconstruction.
Kimura A; Nagasao T; Kaneko T; Tamaki T; Miyamoto J; Nakajima T
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2006 Jun; 34(4):193-200. PubMed ID: 16624567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Masticatory and swallowing threshold performances with conventional and implant-supported prostheses after mandibular fibula free-flap reconstruction.
Roumanas ED; Garrett N; Blackwell KE; Freymiller E; Abemayor E; Wong WK; Beumer J; Fueki K; Fueki W; Kapur KK
J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Oct; 96(4):289-97. PubMed ID: 17052474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Prevention of mandibular fractures by using constructional design principles. I. Computer simulation of human mandibular strength after segmental resections.
Wittkampf AR; Starmans FJ
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 1995 Aug; 24(4):306-10. PubMed ID: 7490497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Challenging the Orthodoxy of Mandibular Reconstructions Comparing Functional Outcomes in Osseous versus Soft Tissue Reconstructions of the Posterolateral Mandible.
Dimovska EOF; Clibbon J; Heaton M; Viswanathan N; Ridha H; James R
J Reconstr Microsurg; 2020 Jan; 36(1):21-27. PubMed ID: 31398761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of mechanical stress in reconstruction plates for bridging mandibular angle defects.
Knoll WD; Gaida A; Maurer P
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2006 Jun; 34(4):201-9. PubMed ID: 16644232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Three-dimensional modeling of the scapular tip for anterolateral and lateral mandibular defects.
Marchiano E; Stevens JR; Liao E; Rosko AJ; Powell AR; Chinn SB; Stucken CL; Spector ME
Oral Oncol; 2020 Aug; 107():104718. PubMed ID: 32361564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Angle-to-Angle Mandibular Defect Reconstruction With Fibula Flap by Using a Mandibular Fixation Device and Surgical Navigation.
Shen SY; Yu Y; Zhang WB; Liu XJ; Peng X
J Craniofac Surg; 2017 Sep; 28(6):1486-1491. PubMed ID: 28749839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
