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.
175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38795258)
21. Effect of Different Customized Abutment Types on Stress Distribution in Implant-Supported Single Crown: A 3D Finite Element Analysis. Pumnil S; Rungsiyakull P; Rungsiyakull C; Elsaka S J Prosthodont; 2022 Jun; 31(5):e2-e11. PubMed ID: 35505638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Fracture strength and failure mode of maxillary implant-supported provisional single crowns: a comparison of composite resin crowns fabricated directly over PEEK abutments and solid titanium abutments. Santing HJ; Meijer HJ; Raghoebar GM; Özcan M Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 Dec; 14(6):882-9. PubMed ID: 21176099 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Mechanical stability of angulated zirconia abutments supporting maxillary anterior single crowns on narrow-diameter implants. Ma R; Yu P; Zhang Y; Xie C; Tan X; Sun J; Yu H Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Jan; 27(1):221-233. PubMed ID: 36161530 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Fracture strength study of internally connected zirconia abutments reinforced with titanium inserts. Chun HJ; Yeo IS; Lee JH; Kim SK; Heo SJ; Koak JY; Han JS; Lee SJ Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(2):346-50. PubMed ID: 25830395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparative analysis of stress distribution around CFR‑PEEK implants and titanium implants with different prosthetic crowns: A finite element analysis. Tamrakar SK; Mishra SK; Chowdhary R; Rao S Dent Med Probl; 2021; 58(3):359-367. PubMed ID: 34597479 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Assessment of stress/strain in dental implants and abutments of alternative materials compared to conventional titanium alloy-3D non-linear finite element analysis. Tretto PHW; Dos Santos MBF; Spazzin AO; Pereira GKR; Bacchi A Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin; 2020 Jun; 23(8):372-383. PubMed ID: 32116034 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Fracture resistance of crowns cemented on titanium and zirconia implant abutments: a comparison of monolithic versus manually veneered all-ceramic systems. Martínez-Rus F; Ferreiroa A; Özcan M; Bartolomé JF; Pradíes G Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2012; 27(6):1448-55. PubMed ID: 23189296 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Fracture Resistance of Single-Unit Implant-Supported Crowns: Effects of Prosthetic Design and Restorative Material. Donmez MB; Diken Turksayar AA; Olcay EO; Sahmali SM J Prosthodont; 2022 Apr; 31(4):348-355. PubMed ID: 34383979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Influence of preparation and wall thickness on the resistance to fracture of zirconia implant abutments. Att W; Yajima ND; Wolkewitz M; Witkowski S; Strub JR Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2012 May; 14 Suppl 1():e196-203. PubMed ID: 22222141 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The influence of the shock-absorbing restorative materials on the stress distributions of short dental implant rehabilitations. Huang ZL; Shi JY; Zhang X; Gu YX; Lai HC Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2021 Jan; 25(1):24-34. PubMed ID: 33506889 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Biomechanical analyses of one-piece dental implants composed of titanium, zirconia, PEEK, CFR-PEEK, or GFR-PEEK: Stresses, strains, and bone remodeling prediction by the finite element method. Fabris D; Moura JPA; Fredel MC; Souza JCM; Silva FS; Henriques B J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater; 2022 Jan; 110(1):79-88. PubMed ID: 34173713 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Regular and platform switching: bone stress analysis varying implant type. Gurgel-Juarez NC; de Almeida EO; Rocha EP; Freitas AC; Anchieta RB; de Vargas LC; Kina S; França FM J Prosthodont; 2012 Apr; 21(3):160-6. PubMed ID: 22372756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Biomechanical Analysis of One-Piece Postand- Core: High-Performance Polymers vs Conventional Materials. Şentürk A; Akaltan F; Aydog Ö; Yilmaz B Int J Prosthodont; 2024 Jun; (3):339-348. PubMed ID: 38227831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Bending moments of zirconia and titanium implant abutments supporting all-ceramic crowns after aging. Mühlemann S; Truninger TC; Stawarczyk B; Hämmerle CH; Sailer I Clin Oral Implants Res; 2014 Jan; 25(1):74-81. PubMed ID: 23735182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of fracture resistance of pressable metal ceramic custom implant abutment with a commercially fabricated CAD/CAM zirconia implant abutment. Protopapadaki M; Monaco EA; Kim HI; Davis EL J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Nov; 110(5):389-96. PubMed ID: 24011801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Dental biomechanics of root-analog implants in different bone types. Tribst JPM; Dal Piva AMO; Blom EJ; Kleverlaan CJ; Feilzer AJ J Prosthet Dent; 2024 May; 131(5):905-915. PubMed ID: 36428106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Biomechanical performance of Ti-PEEK dental implants in bone: An in-silico analysis. Ouldyerou A; Merdji A; Aminallah L; Roy S; Mehboob H; Özcan M J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2022 Oct; 134():105422. PubMed ID: 36037710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Network meta-analysis of survival rate and complications in implant-supported single crowns with different abutment materials. Hu M; Chen J; Pei X; Han J; Wang J J Dent; 2019 Sep; 88():103115. PubMed ID: 30986515 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Biomechanical reinforcement by CAD-CAM materials affects stress distributions of posterior composite bridges: 3D finite element analysis. Elraggal A; Abdelraheem IM; Watts DC; Roy S; Dommeti VK; Alshabib A; Althaqafi KA; Afifi RR Dent Mater; 2024 May; 40(5):869-877. PubMed ID: 38609774 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Fracture resistance of titanium and zirconia abutments: an in vitro study. Foong JK; Judge RB; Palamara JE; Swain MV J Prosthet Dent; 2013 May; 109(5):304-12. PubMed ID: 23684280 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]