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 *

305 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10960985)

  • 1. Mechanics of the implant-abutment connection: an 8-degree taper compared to a butt joint connection.
    Merz BR; Hunenbart S; Belser UC
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2000; 15(4):519-26. PubMed ID: 10960985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Dynamic fatigue resistance of implant-abutment junction in an internally notched morse-taper oral implant: influence of abutment design.
    Cehreli MC; Akça K; Iplikçioğlu H; Sahin S
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2004 Aug; 15(4):459-65. PubMed ID: 15248881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Force transmission of one- and two-piece morse-taper oral implants: a nonlinear finite element analysis.
    Cehreli MC; Akça K; Iplikçioğlu H
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2004 Aug; 15(4):481-9. PubMed ID: 15248884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Implant-abutment interface design affects fatigue and fracture strength of implants.
    Steinebrunner L; Wolfart S; Ludwig K; Kern M
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2008 Dec; 19(12):1276-84. PubMed ID: 19040443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparative stress analyses of fixed free-end osseointegrated prostheses using the finite element method.
    Melo C; Matsushita Y; Koyano K; Hirowatari H; Suetsugu T
    J Oral Implantol; 1995; 21(4):290-4. PubMed ID: 8699521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dynamic fatigue properties of the dental implant-abutment interface: joint opening in wide-diameter versus standard-diameter hex-type implants.
    Hoyer SA; Stanford CM; Buranadham S; Fridrich T; Wagner J; Gratton D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jun; 85(6):599-607. PubMed ID: 11404760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Finite element analysis of effect of prosthesis height, angle of force application, and implant offset on supporting bone.
    Sütpideler M; Eckert SE; Zobitz M; An KN
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(6):819-25. PubMed ID: 15623056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The dynamic natures of implant loading.
    Wang RF; Kang B; Lang LA; Razzoog ME
    J Prosthet Dent; 2009 Jun; 101(6):359-71. PubMed ID: 19463663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Experimental and computational investigation of Morse taper conometric system reliability for the definition of fixed connections between dental implants and prostheses.
    Bressan E; Lops D; Tomasi C; Ricci S; Stocchero M; Carniel EL
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2014 Jul; 228(7):674-81. PubMed ID: 25057094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of implant abutment type on stress distribution in bone under various loading conditions using finite element analysis.
    Chun HJ; Shin HS; Han CH; Lee SH
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(2):195-202. PubMed ID: 16634489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An in vitro load evaluation of a conical implant system with 2 abutment designs and 3 different retaining-screw alloys.
    Erneklint C; Odman P; Ortengren U; Karlsson S
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2006; 21(5):733-7. PubMed ID: 17066634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. New prosthetic restorative features of Ankylos implant system.
    Weigl P
    J Oral Implantol; 2004; 30(3):178-88. PubMed ID: 15255395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The influence of abutment angulation on micromotion level for immediately loaded dental implants: a 3-D finite element analysis.
    Kao HC; Gung YW; Chung TF; Hsu ML
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):623-30. PubMed ID: 18807557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Removal torques of conical, tapered implant abutments: the effects of anodization and reduction of surface area.
    Squier RS; Psoter WJ; Taylor TD
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(1):24-7. PubMed ID: 11858571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Single tooth replacement by Morse taper connection implants: a retrospective study of 80 implants.
    Mangano C; Bartolucci EG
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(5):675-80. PubMed ID: 11669250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of the ITI Morse taper implant/abutment design with an internal modification.
    Ding TA; Woody RD; Higginbottom FL; Miller BH
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(6):865-72. PubMed ID: 14696662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of non-linear finite element stress analysis with in vitro strain gauge measurements on a Morse taper implant.
    Iplikçioğlu H; Akça K; Cehreli MC; Sahin S
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(2):258-65. PubMed ID: 12705305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A classification system to measure the implant-abutment microgap.
    Kano SC; Binon PP; Curtis DA
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(6):879-85. PubMed ID: 18271368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Fracture resistance of the implant-abutment connection in implants with internal hex and internal conical connections under oblique compressive loading: an in vitro study.
    Coppedê AR; Bersani E; de Mattos Mda G; Rodrigues RC; Sartori IA; Ribeiro RF
    Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(3):283-6. PubMed ID: 19548411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Stress analysis in platform-switching implants: a 3-dimensional finite element study.
    Pellizzer EP; Verri FR; Falcón-Antenucci RM; Júnior JF; de Carvalho PS; de Moraes SL; Noritomi PY
    J Oral Implantol; 2012 Oct; 38(5):587-94. PubMed ID: 20932121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.