411 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25290280)
1. Investigation of influence of different implant size and placement on stress distribution with 3-dimensional finite element analysis.
Balkaya MC
Implant Dent; 2014 Dec; 23(6):716-22. PubMed ID: 25290280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Biomechanical Comparison of Different Implant Inclinations and Cantilever Lengths in All-on-4 Treatment Concept by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis.
Ozan O; Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(1):64-71. PubMed ID: 29340344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Implant-bone interface stress distribution in immediately loaded implants of different diameters: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Ding X; Zhu XH; Liao SH; Zhang XH; Chen H
J Prosthodont; 2009 Jul; 18(5):393-402. PubMed ID: 19374710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Biomechanical Behaviors of Implants with Different Connections, Lengths, and Diameters Placed in the Maxillary Anterior Region.
Borie E; Orsi IA; Noritomi PY; Kemmoku DT
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2016; 31(1):101-10. PubMed ID: 26478969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A finite element analysis of two different dental implants: stress distribution in the prosthesis, abutment, implant, and supporting bone.
Quaresma SE; Cury PR; Sendyk WR; Sendyk C
J Oral Implantol; 2008; 34(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 18390236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of vertical and angular misfit in implant-supported fixed prostheses.
Assunção WG; Gomes EA; Rocha EP; Delben JA
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(4):788-96. PubMed ID: 21841989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Finite element stress analysis of dental prostheses supported by straight and angled implants.
Cruz M; Wassall T; Toledo EM; da Silva Barra LP; Cruz S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(3):391-403. PubMed ID: 19587860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical evaluation of platform switching in different implant protocols: computed tomography-based three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Pessoa RS; Vaz LG; Marcantonio E; Vander Sloten J; Duyck J; Jaecques SV
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2010; 25(5):911-9. PubMed ID: 20862404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Platform switching: biomechanical evaluation using three-dimensional finite element analysis.
Tabata LF; Rocha EP; Barão VA; Assunção WG
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2011; 26(3):482-91. PubMed ID: 21691594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Influence of tapered and external hexagon connections on bone stresses around tilted dental implants: three-dimensional finite element method with statistical analysis.
de Faria Almeida DA; Pellizzer EP; Verri FR; Santiago JF; de Carvalho PS
J Periodontol; 2014 Feb; 85(2):261-9. PubMed ID: 23688104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
