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.
240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10172771)
1. Biocompatibility testing for medical implant materials: the activities of F04.16 on biocompatibility test methods. St John KR Stand News; 1994 Mar; 22(3):46-9. PubMed ID: 10172771 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Biostability of materials and implants. Bruck SD J Long Term Eff Med Implants; 1991; 1(1):89-106. PubMed ID: 10171109 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An overview of implant materials. Simon JP; Fabry G Acta Orthop Belg; 1991; 57(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 2038938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The need for a systems approach in biomaterials testing. Vienken J Med Device Technol; 2007 Sep; 18(5):12-4, 16-7. PubMed ID: 17939365 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Study on all-round evaluation of biocompatibility of biomaterial]. Huo D; Zhan D; Hou C; Zhang W; Zheng S; Ren Y; Chen B Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2006 Dec; 23(6):1350-4. PubMed ID: 17228742 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impact of contact angle on the biocompatibility of biomaterials. Menzies KL; Jones L Optom Vis Sci; 2010 Jun; 87(6):387-99. PubMed ID: 20375749 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Evaluation of immunological toxicity of medical devices]. Yang X; Xi T Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2007 Oct; 24(5):1191-5. PubMed ID: 18027725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Delayed in vitro immune response to long-term intraperitoneal polymer implant in mice. Maurin N; Guernier C; Daty N J Biomed Mater Res; 1995 Dec; 29(12):1493-8. PubMed ID: 8600139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Implant retrieval, analysis, and database: a challenge for the medical devices industry. Bruck SD J Long Term Eff Med Implants; 1992; 2(2-3):93-7. PubMed ID: 10171617 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The important role of material and chemical characterisation in device evaluation. Albert DE Med Device Technol; 2004 Jun; 15(5):15-8. PubMed ID: 15285481 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How is the biocompatibilty of dental biomaterials evaluated? Murray PE; García Godoy C; García Godoy F Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2007 May; 12(3):E258-66. PubMed ID: 17468726 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Standards in surgical implants: the present status. Bloch B Biomed Eng; 1972 Oct; 7(9-2):426-9. PubMed ID: 4680588 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Controlling the quality of raw materials. Donawa ME Med Device Technol; 1998; 9(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 10176139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Objectivity in the evaluation of biological safety of medical devices and biomaterials. Williams D Med Device Technol; 1991; 2(1):44-8. PubMed ID: 10171151 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Study of the correlation between in vitro and in vivo evaluation methods on biomaterials--DNA test and muscular implant test]. Wen X; Zhang C; Liu X; Gu G Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2000 Dec; 17(4):444-6. PubMed ID: 11211836 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Metastable biocompatibility: a new approach. Williams D Med Device Technol; 2007; 18(3):8, 10-1. PubMed ID: 17585712 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Use of irradiation technique for obtaining and modifying biopolymers. Review]. Lewandowska-Szumieł M; Kałuska I Polim Med; 1995; 25(1-2):57-67. PubMed ID: 7479428 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The importance of advanced material selection and testing strategies. Norlin-Weissenrieder A; Board S Med Device Technol; 2007 Sep; 18(5):22-4, 26-7. PubMed ID: 17939367 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [In vivo evaluation of the development of biocompatible materials]. Shimizu Y Nihon Rinsho; 1985 Dec; 43(12):2684-8. PubMed ID: 3012148 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]