These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 297794)

  • 1. Stress analysis of blade implant--mechanical properties of implant materials and stress distribution.
    Suetsugu T; Kitoh M; Murakami Y
    J Oral Implantol; 1979; 8(3):380-92. PubMed ID: 297794
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A biomathematical study on implant design and stress distribution.
    Kitoh M; Suetsugu T; Murakami Y; Tabata T
    Bull Tokyo Med Dent Univ; 1978 Dec; 25(4):269-76. PubMed ID: 282021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Deformation studies of an embalmed human mandible in the wet state and an implant blade under static loading].
    Shimada J; Koh T; Yamamoto Y; Sumida H; Hasuike T; Niikura K; Yagiu Y
    Josai Shika Daigaku Kiyo; 1981; 10(3):413-21. PubMed ID: 6959671
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Implant prostheses. Blade vs. cantilever--clinical trial.
    Schnitman P; Rubenstein JE; Jeffcoat MK; Bertolami CN; Koch GC; Shulman LB
    J Oral Implantol; 1986; 12(3):449-59. PubMed ID: 3550114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 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. Stress distribution caused by blade type dental implants.
    Farah JW; Craig RG; Yapp RA
    Implantologist; 1979 Mar; 1(4):82-5. PubMed ID: 296139
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional finite element analysis of a blade implant.
    Ismail YH; Pahountis LN; Fleming JF
    Int J Oral Implantol; 1987; 4(2):25-31. PubMed ID: 3269833
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Step-wise analysis of the dental implant insertion process using the finite element technique.
    van Staden RC; Guan H; Johnson NW; Loo YC; Meredith N
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2008 Mar; 19(3):303-13. PubMed ID: 18081871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparative photoelastic stress analysis of four blade-type endosteal implants.
    Vajda TT; Fung JY
    J Oral Implantol; 1979; 8(2):257-69. PubMed ID: 397964
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An alternative technique to the endosseous blade implant.
    Fagan MJ
    J Oral Implantol; 1979; 8(4):559-62. PubMed ID: 398890
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Endosteal blade implants: an overview of current literature.
    Levine M; Laracuente JM
    Ohio Dent J; 1978 Sep; 52(9):18-22. PubMed ID: 396493
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The relationship between endosteal implant design and function: maximum stress distribution with computer-formed, three dimensional Flexi-Cup blades.
    Valen M
    J Oral Implantol; 1983; 11(1):49-71. PubMed ID: 6368845
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mechanical analysis of Linkow blade vent implants.
    Dahl GS
    J Oral Implantol; 1983; 11(1):89-92. PubMed ID: 6368847
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The influence of implant geometry on the stress distribution around dental implants.
    Cook SD; Klawitter JJ; Weinstein AM
    J Biomed Mater Res; 1982 Jul; 16(4):369-79. PubMed ID: 7107655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Parameters affecting the stress distribution around LTI carbon and aluminum oxide dental implants.
    Cook SD; Weinstein AM; Klawitter JJ
    J Biomed Mater Res; 1982 Nov; 16(6):875-85. PubMed ID: 7174713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Influence of anisotropy on peri-implant stress and strain in complete mandible model from CT.
    Liao SH; Tong RF; Dong JX
    Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2008 Jan; 32(1):53-60. PubMed ID: 17951028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The experimental verification of the efficacy of finite element modeling to dental implant systems.
    Baiamonte T; Abbate MF; Pizzarello F; Lozada J; James R
    J Oral Implantol; 1996; 22(2):104-10. PubMed ID: 9151632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Case report--repair of a 7-year-old blade implant.
    Ehudin MM
    Dent Surv; 1979 Mar; 55(3):70-3. PubMed ID: 397137
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Biomechanical comparison of straight and staggered implant placement configurations.
    Itoh H; Caputo AA; Kuroe T; Nakahara H
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2004 Feb; 24(1):47-55. PubMed ID: 14984145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.