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.
2. Scalloped dental implants: a retrospective analysis of radiographic and clinical outcomes of 17 NobelPerfect implants in 6 patients. Nowzari H; Chee W; Yi K; Pak M; Chung WH; Rich S Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2006; 8(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 16681488 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The effect of interimplant distance on the height of the interimplant bone crest when using platform-switched implants. Rodríguez-Ciurana X; Vela-Nebot X; Segalà-Torres M; Calvo-Guirado JL; Cambra J; Méndez-Blanco V; Tarnow DP Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2009 Apr; 29(2):141-51. PubMed ID: 19408476 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Periimplant tissue response following immediate provisional restoration of scalloped implants in the esthetic zone: a one-year pilot prospective multicenter study. Kan JY; Rungcharassaeng K; Liddelow G; Henry P; Goodacre CJ J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jun; 97(6 Suppl):S109-18. PubMed ID: 17618925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Treatment outcome of two adjacent implant crowns with different implant platform designs in the aesthetic zone: a 1-year randomized clinical trial. Tymstra N; Raghoebar GM; Vissink A; Den Hartog L; Stellingsma K; Meijer HJ J Clin Periodontol; 2011 Jan; 38(1):74-85. PubMed ID: 21062337 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of the 3-D bone-to-implant relationship on esthetics. Grunder U; Gracis S; Capelli M Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2005 Apr; 25(2):113-9. PubMed ID: 15839587 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Initial clinical efficacy of 3-mm implants immediately placed into function in conditions of limited spacing. Reddy MS; O'Neal SJ; Haigh S; Aponte-Wesson R; Geurs NC Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(2):281-8. PubMed ID: 18548925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A randomized prospective multicenter trial evaluating the platform-switching technique for the prevention of postrestorative crestal bone loss. Prosper L; Redaelli S; Pasi M; Zarone F; Radaelli G; Gherlone EF Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(2):299-308. PubMed ID: 19492646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Stress distribution on scalloped implants with different microthread and connection configurations using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Choi KS; Park SH; Lee JH; Jeon YC; Yun MJ; Jeong CM Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):e29-38. PubMed ID: 22616069 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A 4-year prospective clinical and radiological study of maxillary dental implants supporting single-tooth crowns using early and delayed loading protocols. Turkyilmaz I; Avci M; Kuran S; Ozbek EN Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2007 Dec; 9(4):222-7. PubMed ID: 18031444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Esthetic therapy with standard and scalloped implant designs: the five biologic elements for success. Jovanovic SA J Calif Dent Assoc; 2005 Nov; 33(11):873-80. PubMed ID: 16463909 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Replacement of mandibular molars with single-unit restorations supported by wide-body implants: immediate versus delayed loading. A randomized controlled study. Schincaglia GP; Marzola R; Giovanni GF; Chiara CS; Scotti R Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(3):474-80. PubMed ID: 18700371 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Platform switching as a means to achieving implant esthetics. Gardner DM N Y State Dent J; 2005 Apr; 71(3):34-7. PubMed ID: 16013682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Marginal bone levels and soft tissue conditions around single-tooth implants with a scalloped neck design: results of a prospective 3-year study. Khraisat A; Zembic A; Jung RE; Hammerle CH Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2013; 28(2):550-5. PubMed ID: 23527359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prospective multicenter study of marginal bone level and soft tissue health of a one-piece implant after two years. Finne K; Rompen E; Toljanic J J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jun; 97(6 Suppl):S79-85. PubMed ID: 17618937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of different implant surfaces and designs on marginal bone-level alterations: a review. Abrahamsson I; Berglundh T Clin Oral Implants Res; 2009 Sep; 20 Suppl 4():207-15. PubMed ID: 19663966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Current trends in implantology: Part 1--Biological response, implant stability, and implant design. Saadoun AP; Le Gall MG; Touati B Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2004 Aug; 16(7):529-35; quiz 536, 521. PubMed ID: 15485167 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bone quality and the immediate loading of implants-critical aspects based on literature, research, and clinical experience. Romanos GE Implant Dent; 2009 Jun; 18(3):203-9. PubMed ID: 19509530 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A long-term retrospective study of two different implant surfaces placed after reconstruction of the severely resorbed maxilla using Le Fort I osteotomy and interpositional bone grafting. Marchetti C; Pieri F; Corinaldesi G; Degidi M Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(5):911-8. PubMed ID: 19014162 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Benefits of an implant platform modification technique to reduce crestal bone resorption. Vela-Nebot X; Rodríguez-Ciurana X; Rodado-Alonso C; Segalà-Torres M Implant Dent; 2006 Sep; 15(3):313-20. PubMed ID: 16966906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]