106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1254612)
1. The influence of surface chemistry on implant interface histology: a theoretical basis for implant materials selection.
Clark AE; Hench LL; Paschall HA
J Biomed Mater Res; 1976 Mar; 10(2):161-74. PubMed ID: 1254612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The bone response of oxidized bioactive and non-bioactive titanium implants.
Sul YT; Johansson C; Byon E; Albrektsson T
Biomaterials; 2005 Nov; 26(33):6720-30. PubMed ID: 15975649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The interface of calcium-phosphate and glass-ceramic in bone, a structural analysis.
Gross UM; Müller-Mai CM; Voigt C
Biomaterials; 1990 Jul; 11():83-5. PubMed ID: 2397266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bone-bonding behavior under load-bearing conditions of an alumina ceramic implant incorporating beads coated with glass-ceramic containing apatite and wollastonite.
Li ZL; Kitsugi T; Yamamuro T; Chang YS; Senaha Y; Takagi H; Nakamura T; Oka M
J Biomed Mater Res; 1995 Sep; 29(9):1081-8. PubMed ID: 8567706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Electrical stimulation of bone growth into porous A12O3.
Weinstein AM; Klawitter JJ; Cleveland TW
J Biomed Mater Res; 1976 Mar; 10(2):231-47. PubMed ID: 1254614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Peri-implant osteogenesis in health and osteoporosis.
Marco F; Milena F; Gianluca G; Vittoria O
Micron; 2005; 36(7-8):630-44. PubMed ID: 16182543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Piezoelectric ceramic implants: in vivo results.
Park JB; Kelly BJ; Kenner GH; von Recum AF; Grether MF; Coffeen WW
J Biomed Mater Res; 1981 Jan; 15(1):103-10. PubMed ID: 7348700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Tissue reaction after implantation of ceramic biomaterials with introduced electrokinetic zeta potential on surface].
Lewandowski R; Rutowski R; Staniszewska-Kuś J; Pielka S; Wnukiewicz B
Polim Med; 2004; 34(1):13-25. PubMed ID: 15222224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Animal studies on bone ingrowth kinetics of ceramic material under dynamic stress.
Dörre E; Geduldig D; Happel M; Lade R; Prüssner P; Willert HG; Zichner L
J Biomed Mater Res; 1976 Jul; 10(4):493-502. PubMed ID: 947912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Preliminary observations of bone ingrowth into porous materials.
Robertson DM; Pierre L; Chahal R
J Biomed Mater Res; 1976 May; 10(3):335-44. PubMed ID: 1270453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of hydroxyapatite impregnation on skeletal bonding of porous coated implants.
Ducheyne P; Hench LL; Kagan A; Martens M; Bursens A; Mulier JC
J Biomed Mater Res; 1980 May; 14(3):225-37. PubMed ID: 7364787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Characterization of bone around titanium implants and bioactive glass particles: an experimental study in rats.
Gorustovich A; Rosenbusch M; Guglielmotti MB
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(5):644-50. PubMed ID: 12381064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Differences in ceramic-bone interface between surface-active ceramics and resorbable ceramics: a study by scanning and transmission electron microscopy.
Neo M; Kotani S; Fujita Y; Nakamura T; Yamamuro T; Bando Y; Ohtsuki C; Kokubo T
J Biomed Mater Res; 1992 Feb; 26(2):255-67. PubMed ID: 1569117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Repair of bone segment defects with surface porous fiber-reinforced polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) composite prosthesis: histomorphometric incorporation model and characterization by SEM.
Hautamäki MP; Aho AJ; Alander P; Rekola J; Gunn J; Strandberg N; Vallittu PK
Acta Orthop; 2008 Aug; 79(4):555-64. PubMed ID: 18766491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Biomechanical and histomorphometric comparison between zirconia implants with varying surface textures and a titanium implant in the maxilla of miniature pigs.
Gahlert M; Gudehus T; Eichhorn S; Steinhauser E; Kniha H; Erhardt W
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2007 Oct; 18(5):662-8. PubMed ID: 17608736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Biophysical and ultrastructural aspects of an implant-bone interface].
Baud CA
SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd; 1976 Sep; 86(9):941-5. PubMed ID: 1068518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An evaluation of variables influencing implant fixation by direct bone apposition.
Thomas KA; Cook SD
J Biomed Mater Res; 1985 Oct; 19(8):875-901. PubMed ID: 3880349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Interfacial analysis of fiber-reinforced bioactive glass dental root implants.
Schepers E; Ducheyne P; De Clercq M
J Biomed Mater Res; 1989 Jul; 23(7):735-52. PubMed ID: 2738085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The status of porous materials to obtain direct skeletal attachment by tissue ingrowth.
Klawitter JJ; Weinstein AM
Acta Orthop Belg; 1974; 40(5-6):755-65. PubMed ID: 4469737
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Regeneration of peri-implant infrabony defects using PerioGlas: a pilot study in rabbits.
Johnson MW; Sullivan SM; Rohrer M; Collier M
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1997; 12(6):835-9. PubMed ID: 9425765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
