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 *

81 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3552975)

  • 1. Force transfer by osseointegration implant devices.
    Kinni ME; Hokama SN; Caputo AA
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1987; 2(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 3552975
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Osseointegration and biomechanics. Cantilever supported implant dentures].
    Bechelli AH; Bechelli M
    Rev Asoc Odontol Argent; 1991; 79(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 2068352
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Stress analysis of single-tooth implants. II. Effect of implant root-length variation and pseudo periodontal ligament incorporation.
    Atmaram GH; Mohammed H
    Implantologist; 1983-1984; 3(1):58-62. PubMed ID: 6386669
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. The effect of a hydroxyapatite-reinforced polyethylene stress distributor in a dental implant on compressive stress levels in surrounding bone.
    Abu-Hammad OA; Harrison A; Williams D
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2000; 15(4):559-64. PubMed ID: 10960990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Occlusal stability in implant prosthodontics -- clinical factors to consider before implant placement.
    Saba S
    J Can Dent Assoc; 2001 Oct; 67(9):522-6. PubMed ID: 11597344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Stress analysis of single-tooth implants. I. Effect of elastic parameters and geometry of implant.
    Atmaram GH; Mohammed H
    Implantologist; 1983-1984; 3(1):24-9. PubMed ID: 6386667
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of load transfer by angulated, standard and inclined implant abutments.
    Tuncelli B; Poyrazoglu E; Köylüoglu AM; Tezcan S
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1997 Jun; 5(2):85-8. PubMed ID: 9487817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Biomaterials and biomechanics in dental implant design.
    Brunski JB
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1988; 3(2):85-97. PubMed ID: 3075195
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of percentage of osseointegration on stress distribution around dental implants.
    Lai H; Zhang F; Zhang B; Yang C; Xue M
    Chin J Dent Res; 1998 Dec; 1(3):7-11. PubMed ID: 10557165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The use of finite element analysis to model bone-implant contact with basal implants.
    Ihde S; Goldmann T; Himmlova L; Aleksic Z
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Jul; 106(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 18439855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Implant-bone interface characteristics of bioglass dental implants.
    Weinstein AM; Klawitter JJ; Cook SD
    J Biomed Mater Res; 1980 Jan; 14(1):23-9. PubMed ID: 6987233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature.
    Geng JP; Tan KB; Liu GR
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Jun; 85(6):585-98. PubMed ID: 11404759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Photoelastic model studies on environmental stress of functionally loaded endosseous dental implants].
    Häfer M; Knöfler W
    Stomatol DDR; 1985 Aug; 35(8):461-7. PubMed ID: 3914108
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Immediate loading dental implants: overview and rationale.
    Derbabian K; Simonian K
    J Calif Dent Assoc; 2005 Apr; 33(4):337-41. PubMed ID: 15915885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A finite element stress analysis of the transmandibular implant system.
    Williams KR; Murphy WM
    Int J Prosthodont; 2001; 14(2):115-9. PubMed ID: 11843446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. A new implant design: a tripod with optimalisation of stress distribution on bone. I. Theoretical considerations.
    Sweijd F
    Bull Group Int Rech Sci Stomatol Odontol; 1979 Jul; 22(3):91-7. PubMed ID: 395977
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Physiological and mechanical requirements for design of a new implant (the Bicortex implant)].
    Texier J
    Inf Dent; 1986 May; 68(21):1991-9. PubMed ID: 3527976
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mechanical properties of bone-implant interface: an in vitro comparison of the parameters at placement and at 3 months.
    Brosh T; Persovski Z; Binderman I
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 1995; 10(6):729-35. PubMed ID: 8530176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.