746 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16900812)
1. Which surface properties enhance bone response to implants? Comparison of oxidized magnesium, TiUnite, and Osseotite implant surfaces.
Sul YT; Johansson C; Albrektsson T
Int J Prosthodont; 2006; 19(4):319-28. PubMed ID: 16900812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Oxidized, bioactive implants are rapidly and strongly integrated in bone. Part 1--experimental implants.
Sul YT; Jeong Y; Johansson C; Albrektsson T
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2006 Oct; 17(5):521-6. PubMed ID: 16958691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimum surface properties of oxidized implants for reinforcement of osseointegration: surface chemistry, oxide thickness, porosity, roughness, and crystal structure.
Sul YT; Johansson C; Wennerberg A; Cho LR; Chang BS; Albrektsson T
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2005; 20(3):349-59. PubMed ID: 15973946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Surface characteristics of electrochemically oxidized implants and acid-etched implants: surface chemistry, morphology, pore configurations, oxide thickness, crystal structure, and roughness.
Sul YT; Byon E; Wennerberg A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):631-40. PubMed ID: 18807558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Osseointegration of titanium implants with a roughened surface containing hydride ion in a rabbit model.
Cheng Z; Zhang F; He F; Zhang L; Guo C; Zhao S; Yang G
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Jul; 110(1):e5-12. PubMed ID: 20610295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An experimental comparison of two different clinically used implant designs and surfaces.
Gottlow J; Barkarmo S; Sennerby L
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 May; 14 Suppl 1():e204-12. PubMed ID: 22487460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of electrochemically deposited nanohydroxyapatite on bone bonding of sandblasted/dual acid-etched titanium implant.
He F; Yang G; Wang X; Zhao S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(5):790-9. PubMed ID: 19865618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Resonance frequency measurements in vivo and related surface properties of magnesium-incorporated, micropatterned and magnesium-incorporated TiUnite, Osseotite, SLA and TiOblast implants.
Sul YT; Jönsson J; Yoon GS; Johansson C
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2009 Oct; 20(10):1146-55. PubMed ID: 19719742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison between bioactive fluoride modified and bioinert anodically oxidized implant surfaces in early bone response using rabbit tibia model.
Choi JY; Lee HJ; Jang JU; Yeo IS
Implant Dent; 2012 Apr; 21(2):124-8. PubMed ID: 22382750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Experimental evidence for interfacial biochemical bonding in osseointegrated titanium implants.
Sul YT; Kwon DH; Kang BS; Oh SJ; Johansson C
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2013 Aug; 24 Suppl A100():8-19. PubMed ID: 22093014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biological performance of chemical hydroxyapatite coating associated with implant surface modification by laser beam: biomechanical study in rabbit tibias.
Faeda RS; Tavares HS; Sartori R; Guastaldi AC; Marcantonio E
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Aug; 67(8):1706-15. PubMed ID: 19615586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Osseointegration of zirconia implants with different surface characteristics: an evaluation in rabbits.
Hoffmann O; Angelov N; Zafiropoulos GG; Andreana S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(2):352-8. PubMed ID: 22442775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effect of hydroxyapatite nanocrystals on early bone formation surrounding dental implants.
Svanborg LM; Hoffman M; Andersson M; Currie F; Kjellin P; Wennerberg A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Mar; 40(3):308-15. PubMed ID: 21111575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Histologic evaluation of bone response to oxidized and turned titanium micro-implants in human jawbone.
Ivanoff CJ; Widmark G; Johansson C; Wennerberg A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2003; 18(3):341-8. PubMed ID: 12814308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Biomechanical evaluation of a microstructured zirconia implant by a removal torque comparison with a standard Ti-SLA implant.
Bormann KH; Gellrich NC; Kniha H; Dard M; Wieland M; Gahlert M
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2012 Oct; 23(10):1210-6. PubMed ID: 22092587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Importance of Ca(2+) modifications for osseointegration of smooth and moderately rough anodized titanium implants - a removal torque and histological evaluation in rabbit.
Fröjd V; Wennerberg A; Franke Stenport V
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Oct; 14(5):737-45. PubMed ID: 20977616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Early bone healing around 2 different experimental, HA grit-blasted, and dual acid-etched titanium implant surfaces. A pilot study in rabbits.
Gobbato L; Arguello E; Martin IS; Hawley CE; Griffin TJ
Implant Dent; 2012 Dec; 21(6):454-60. PubMed ID: 23149502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Osseointegration of two different phosphate ion-containing titanium oxide surfaces in rabbit cancellous bone.
Park JW
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2013 Aug; 24 Suppl A100():145-51. PubMed ID: 22251085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of a novel calcium phosphate-coated titanium porous oxide implant surface: a study in rabbits.
Poulos NM; Rodriguez NA; Lee J; Rueggeberg FA; Schüpbach P; Hall J; Susin C; Wikesjö UM
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):731-8. PubMed ID: 21841981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
