181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25830403)
21. Effect of abutment's height and framework alloy on the load distribution of mandibular cantilevered implant-supported prosthesis.
Suedam V; Souza EA; Moura MS; Jacques LB; Rubo JH
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2009 Feb; 20(2):196-200. PubMed ID: 19191796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Fracture Resistance of Straight and Angulated Zirconia Implant Abutments Supporting Anterior Three-Unit Lithium Disilicate Fixed Dental Prostheses.
Saker S; El-Shahat S; Ghazy M
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2016; 31(6):1240-1246. PubMed ID: 27861648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis on Stress Distribution of Internal Implant-Abutment Engagement Features.
Cho SY; Huh YH; Park CJ; Cho LR
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(2):319-327. PubMed ID: 29534119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Cyclic loading of implant-supported prostheses: comparison of gaps at the prosthetic-abutment interface when cycled abutments are replaced with as-manufactured abutments.
Hecker DM; Eckert SE; Choi YG
J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Jan; 95(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 16399272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Dynamic fatigue properties of the dental implant-abutment interface: joint opening in wide-diameter versus standard-diameter hex-type implants.
Hoyer SA; Stanford CM; Buranadham S; Fridrich T; Wagner J; Gratton D
J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jun; 85(6):599-607. PubMed ID: 11404760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. The influence of stiffness of implant-abutment connection on load-deflection ratios of a screw-retained stiff cantilever beam. 3-D measurements in vitro.
Cassel B; Lundgren D; Karlsson D
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2013 Nov; 24(11):1251-6. PubMed ID: 22906410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Biomechanical effects of two different collar implant structures on stress distribution under cantilever fixed partial dentures.
Merıç G; Erkmen E; Kurt A; Eser A; özden AU
Acta Odontol Scand; 2011 Nov; 69(6):374-84. PubMed ID: 21449688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. A prospective, split-mouth study comparing tilted implants with angulated connection versus conventional implants with angulated abutment.
Van Weehaeghe M; De Bruyn H; Vandeweghe S
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2017 Dec; 19(6):989-996. PubMed ID: 29034578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Biomechanical analysis of inclined and cantilever design with different implant framework materials in mandibular complete-arch implant restorations.
Yu W; Li X; Ma X; Xu X
J Prosthet Dent; 2022 May; 127(5):783.e1-783.e10. PubMed ID: 35305832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The Performance of Abutment Material and Finish Line Configuration on the Stress Distribution and Fracture Resistance of Implant-Supported Zirconia Fixed Partial Dentures When Loaded in a Bio-Faithful Model.
Radwan MM; Shabban AA; Elshafey D; Mahrous AI
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2021; 41(6):e265-e275. PubMed ID: 34818395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. The influence of mandibular deformation, implant numbers, and loading position on detected forces in abutments supporting fixed implant superstructures.
Hobkirk JA; Havthoulas TK
J Prosthet Dent; 1998 Aug; 80(2):169-74. PubMed ID: 9710818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The Impact of Force Transmission on Narrow-Body Dental Implants Made of Commercially Pure Titanium and Titanium Zirconia Alloy with a Conical Implant-Abutment Connection: An Experimental Pilot Study.
Nelson K; Schmelzeisen R; Taylor TD; Zabler S; Wiest W; Fretwurst T
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2016; 31(5):1066-71. PubMed ID: 27632261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Mechanical behavior of dental implants in different positions in the rehabilitation of the anterior maxilla.
Corrêa CB; Margonar R; Noritomi PY; Vaz LG
J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Apr; 111(4):301-9. PubMed ID: 24355510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Effects of the implant design on peri-implant bone stress and abutment micromovement: three-dimensional finite element analysis of original computer-aided design models.
Yamanishi Y; Yamaguchi S; Imazato S; Nakano T; Yatani H
J Periodontol; 2014 Sep; 85(9):e333-8. PubMed ID: 24835549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Effect of cantilever length and framework alloy on the stress distribution of mandibular-cantilevered implant-supported prostheses.
Jacques LB; Moura MS; Suedam V; Souza EA; Rubo JH
Clin Oral Implants Res; 2009 Jul; 20(7):737-41. PubMed ID: 19489929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Photoelastic stress analysis of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by 3 dental implants.
Simamoto Júnior PC; da Silva-Neto JP; Novais VR; de Arruda Nóbilo MA; das Neves FD; Araujo CA
Implant Dent; 2014 Dec; 23(6):704-9. PubMed ID: 25290285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Stress patterns around distal angled implants in the all-on-four concept configuration.
Begg T; Geerts GA; Gryzagoridis J
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009; 24(4):663-71. PubMed ID: 19885406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
