438 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22442769)
1. Effects of 10 cleaning instruments on four different implant surfaces.
Schmage P; Thielemann J; Nergiz I; Scorziello TM; Pfeiffer P
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(2):308-17. PubMed ID: 22442769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cleaning effectiveness of implant prophylaxis instruments.
Schmage P; Kahili F; Nergiz I; Scorziello TM; Platzer U; Pfeiffer P
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(2):331-7. PubMed ID: 24683558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Influence of implant surface topography on bone-regenerative potential and mechanical retention in the human maxilla and mandible.
Wei N; Bin S; Jing Z; Wei S; Yingqiong Z
Am J Dent; 2014 Jun; 27(3):171-6. PubMed ID: 25208367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bacterial adhesion on smooth and rough titanium surfaces after treatment with different instruments.
Duarte PM; Reis AF; de Freitas PM; Ota-Tsuzuki C
J Periodontol; 2009 Nov; 80(11):1824-32. PubMed ID: 19905952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Influence of the height of the external hexagon and surface treatment on fatigue life of commercially pure titanium dental implants.
Gil FJ; Aparicio C; Manero JM; Padros A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(4):583-90. PubMed ID: 19885397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Removal torque and histomorphometric evaluation of bioceramic grit-blasted/acid-etched and dual acid-etched implant surfaces: an experimental study in dogs.
Marin C; Granato R; Suzuki M; Gil JN; Piattelli A; Coelho PG
J Periodontol; 2008 Oct; 79(10):1942-9. PubMed ID: 18834250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Surface alterations of polished and sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implants after Er:YAG, carbon dioxide, and diode laser irradiation.
Stubinger S; Etter C; Miskiewicz M; Homann F; Saldamli B; Wieland M; Sader R
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(1):104-11. PubMed ID: 20209192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Titanium dental implant surface micromorphology optimization.
Juodzbalys G; Sapragoniene M; Wennerberg A; Baltrukonis T
J Oral Implantol; 2007; 33(4):177-85. PubMed ID: 17912958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. The influence of surface roughness on the displacement of osteogenic bone particles during placement of titanium screw-type implants.
Tabassum A; Walboomers F; Wolke JG; Meijer GJ; Jansen JA
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2011 Dec; 13(4):269-78. PubMed ID: 19673924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cell Attachment Following Instrumentation with Titanium and Plastic Instruments, Diode Laser, and Titanium Brush on Titanium, Titanium-Zirconium, and Zirconia Surfaces.
Lang MS; Cerutis DR; Miyamoto T; Nunn ME
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2016; 31(4):799-806. PubMed ID: 27447145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Direct assessment of profilometric roughness variability from typical implant surface types.
Kohles SS; Clark MB; Brown CA; Kenealy JN
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2004; 19(4):510-6. PubMed ID: 15346747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Characterization of five different implant surfaces and their effect on osseointegration: a study in dogs.
Coelho PG; Bonfante EA; Pessoa RS; Marin C; Granato R; Giro G; Witek L; Suzuki M
J Periodontol; 2011 May; 82(5):742-50. PubMed ID: 21054223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The effects of scaling a titanium implant surface with metal and plastic instruments: an in vitro study.
Fox SC; Moriarty JD; Kusy RP
J Periodontol; 1990 Aug; 61(8):485-90. PubMed ID: 2202807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An in vitro study of the treatment of implant surfaces with different instruments.
Mengel R; Buns CE; Mengel C; Flores-de-Jacoby L
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1998; 13(1):91-6. PubMed ID: 9509785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Surface analysis of machined versus sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implants.
Orsini G; Assenza B; Scarano A; Piattelli M; Piattelli A
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2000; 15(6):779-84. PubMed ID: 11151575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Histomorphologic and bone-to-implant contact evaluation of dual acid-etched and bioceramic grit-blasted implant surfaces: an experimental study in dogs.
Suzuki M; Guimaraes MV; Marin C; Granato R; Fernandes CA; Gil JN; Coelho PG
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Aug; 68(8):1877-83. PubMed ID: 20542367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Fractal analysis: a novel method to assess roughness organization of implant surface topography.
Perrotti V; Aprile G; Degidi M; Piattelli A; Iezzi G
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2011; 31(6):633-9. PubMed ID: 22140665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
