367 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19418861)
1. A finite element analysis of tilted versus nontilted implant configurations in the edentulous maxilla.
Bellini CM; Romeo D; Galbusera F; Agliardi E; Pietrabissa R; Zampelis A; Francetti L
Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(2):155-7. PubMed ID: 19418861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of tilted versus nontilted implant-supported prosthetic designs for the restoration of the edentuous mandible: a biomechanical study.
Bellini CM; Romeo D; Galbusera F; Taschieri S; Raimondi MT; Zampelis A; Francetti L
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(3):511-7. PubMed ID: 19587875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Tilted or parallel implant placement in the completely edentulous mandible? A three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Naini RB; Nokar S; Borghei H; Alikhasi M
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):776-81. PubMed ID: 21841987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Tilting of splinted implants for improved prosthodontic support: a two-dimensional finite element analysis.
Zampelis A; Rangert B; Heijl L
J Prosthet Dent; 2007 Jun; 97(6 Suppl):S35-43. PubMed ID: 17618932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Finite element stress analysis of the influence of staggered versus straight placement of dental implants.
Akça K; Iplikçioğlu H
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(5):722-30. PubMed ID: 11669255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The influence of cantilever length and implant inclination on stress distribution in maxillary implant-supported fixed dentures.
Bevilacqua M; Tealdo T; Menini M; Pera F; Mossolov A; Drago C; Pera P
J Prosthet Dent; 2011 Jan; 105(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 21194582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of different implant configurations for a mandibular fixed prosthesis.
Fazi G; Tellini S; Vangi D; Branchi R
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):752-9. PubMed ID: 21841984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of load transmission using different implant inclinations and cantilever lengths.
Bevilacqua M; Tealdo T; Pera F; Menini M; Mossolov A; Drago C; Pera P
Int J Prosthodont; 2008; 21(6):539-42. PubMed ID: 19149073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Influence of arch shape and implant position on stress distribution around implants supporting fixed full-arch prosthesis in edentulous maxilla.
Sagat G; Yalcin S; Gultekin BA; Mijiritsky E
Implant Dent; 2010 Dec; 19(6):498-508. PubMed ID: 21119354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical effects of a maxillary implant in the augmented sinus: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Huang HL; Fuh LJ; Ko CC; Hsu JT; Chen CC
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(3):455-62. PubMed ID: 19587867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Baggi L; Cappelloni I; Di Girolamo M; Maceri F; Vairo G
J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Dec; 100(6):422-31. PubMed ID: 19033026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Implant-bone load transfer mechanisms in complete-arch prostheses supported by four implants: a three-dimensional finite element approach.
Baggi L; Pastore S; Di Girolamo M; Vairo G
J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Jan; 109(1):9-21. PubMed ID: 23328192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomechanical aspects of two different implant-prosthetic concepts for edentulous maxillae.
Benzing UR; Gall H; Weber H
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1995; 10(2):188-98. PubMed ID: 7744438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Factorial analysis of variables influencing mechanical characteristics of a single tooth implant placed in the maxilla using finite element analysis and the statistics-based Taguchi method.
Lin CL; Chang SH; Chang WJ; Kuo YC
Eur J Oral Sci; 2007 Oct; 115(5):408-16. PubMed ID: 17850430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Stress and strain distribution behavior in the bone due to the effect of cancellous bone, dental implant material and the bone height.
Hedia HS
Biomed Mater Eng; 2002; 12(2):111-9. PubMed ID: 12122235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Finite element stress analysis of edentulous mandibles with different bone types supporting multiple-implant superstructures.
de Almeida EO; Rocha EP; Freitas AC; Freitas MM
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(6):1108-14. PubMed ID: 21197486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bone loading pattern around implants in average and atrophic edentulous maxillae: a finite-element analysis.
Meyer U; Vollmer D; Runte C; Bourauel C; Joos U
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2001 Apr; 29(2):100-5. PubMed ID: 11465432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effects of different inter-implant distances on the stress distribution around endosseous implants in posterior mandible: a 3D finite element analysis.
Simşek B; Erkmen E; Yilmaz D; Eser A
Med Eng Phys; 2006 Apr; 28(3):199-213. PubMed ID: 15979921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The use of finite element analysis to model bone-implant contact with basal implants.
Ihde S; Goldmann T; Himmlova L; Aleksic Z
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Jul; 106(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 18439855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
