599 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21841987)
21. Syncrystallization: a technique for temporization of immediately loaded implants with metal-reinforced acrylic resin restorations.
Degidi M; Gehrke P; Spanel A; Piattelli A
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2006; 8(3):123-34. PubMed ID: 16919020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Huang HL; Huang JS; Ko CC; Hsu JT; Chang CH; Chen MY
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2005 Aug; 16(4):466-72. PubMed ID: 16117772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Bone strains around immediately loaded implants supporting mandibular overdentures in human cadavers.
Akça K; Akkocaoglu M; Cömert A; Tekdemir I; Cehreli MC
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(1):101-9. PubMed ID: 17340903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Treatment planning of implants when 3 mandibular posterior teeth are missing: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis.
Chen XY; Zhang CY; Nie EM; Zhang MC
Implant Dent; 2012 Aug; 21(4):340-3. PubMed ID: 22814561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Stress analysis in edentulous mandibular bone supporting implant-retained 1-piece or multiple superstructures.
Yokoyama S; Wakabayashi N; Shiota M; Ohyama T
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2005; 20(4):578-83. PubMed ID: 16161742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. A three-dimensional finite element study on two versus four implants in an edentulous mandible.
Meijer HJ; Starmans FJ; Steen WH; Bosman F
Int J Prosthodont; 1994; 7(3):271-9. PubMed ID: 7916894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. On the role of number of fixtures, surgical technique and timing of loading.
Eliasson A
Swed Dent J Suppl; 2008; (197):3-95. PubMed ID: 18652085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. Impact of dental and zygomatic implants on stress distribution in maxillary defects: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis study.
Korkmaz FM; Korkmaz YT; Yaluğ S; Korkmaz T
J Oral Implantol; 2012 Oct; 38(5):557-67. PubMed ID: 20925533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Biomechanical study of mandible bone supporting a four-implant retained bridge: finite element analysis of the influence of bone anisotropy and foodstuff position.
Bonnet AS; Postaire M; Lipinski P
Med Eng Phys; 2009 Sep; 31(7):806-15. PubMed ID: 19395303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Biomechanical rationale for intentionally inclined implants in the posterior mandible using 3D finite element analysis.
Satoh T; Maeda Y; Komiyama Y
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2005; 20(4):533-9. PubMed ID: 16161737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Influence of crown-to-implant ratio, retention system, restorative material, and occlusal loading on stress concentrations in single short implants.
Sotto-Maior BS; Senna PM; da Silva WJ; Rocha EP; Del Bel Cury AA
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(3):e13-8. PubMed ID: 22616067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Load transfer in tilted implants with varying cantilever lengths in an all-on-four situation.
Malhotra AO; Padmanabhan TV; Mohamed K; Natarajan S; Elavia U
Aust Dent J; 2012 Dec; 57(4):440-5. PubMed ID: 23186568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Influence of restoration type on stress distribution in bone around implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Stegaroiu R; Sato T; Kusakari H; Miyakawa O
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1998; 13(1):82-90. PubMed ID: 9509784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Histologic and histomorphometric evaluation of peri-implant bone subjected to immediate loading: an experimental study with Macaca fascicularis.
Romanos GE; Toh CG; Siar CH; Swaminathan D
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2002; 17(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 11858574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of 1-piece superstructure on mandibular flexure.
Naini RB; Nokar S
Implant Dent; 2009 Oct; 18(5):428-37. PubMed ID: 22129961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The effect of superstructure design on stress distribution in peri-implant bone during mandibular flexure.
Nokar S; Baghai Naini R
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 20209184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
