Open Access
Med Buccale Chir Buccale
Volume 22, Number 2, avril 2016
Page(s) 97 - 104
Section Article original / Original article
Published online 19 February 2016
  1. Lum LB. A biomechanical rationale for use of short implants. J Oral Implantol 1991;17:126-131. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Mish CE. Short dental implants: a literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today 2005;24:64-68. [Google Scholar]
  3. Misch CE, Steigenga J, Barboza E, Misch-Dietsh F, Canciola LJ, Kazor C. Short dental implants in posterior partial edentulism: a multicenter retrospective 6-year case series study. J Periodontol 2006;77:1341-1347. [Google Scholar]
  4. Tawil G, Aboujaoude N, Younan R. Implants courts: les taux de survie et de complications. Titane 2006;3:43-50. [Google Scholar]
  5. Grant BT, Pancko FX, Kraut RA. Outcomes of placing short dental implants in the posterior mandible: A retrospective study of 124 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:713-717. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Davarpanah M, Szmuklr-Moncler S, Khoury PM, Jabubowicz-Kohen B, Martinez H. Manuel d‘implantologie clinique : Concepts, protocoles et innovations recentes. 2e ed. CdP, Paris, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  7. Hoff L. Influence des traitements de surface implantaire sur l’accélération de l’ostéo intégration. Thèse Chir Dent. Nancy : Univ H. Poincaré, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  8. Nissan J, Gross O, Ghelfan O, Priel I, Gross M, Chaushu G. The effect of splinting implant-supported restorations on stress distribution of different crown-implant ratios and crown height spaces. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;12:2990-2994. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. Isidor F. Histological evaluation of peri-implant bone on implant subjected to overload or plaque accumulation. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:1-9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Isidor F. Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:143-152. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Canullo L, Fedele GR, Iannello G, Jepsen S. Platform switching and marginal bone-level alterations: the results of a randomized-controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:115-121. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Serio FG. Clinical rationale for tooth stabilization and splinting. Dent Clin North Am 1999;43:1-12. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Brunski JB, Puleo DA, Nanci A. Biomaterials and biomechanics of oral and maxillofacial implants: Current status and future developments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:15-21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Blanes RJ, Bernard JP, Blanes ZM, Belser UC. A 10-year prospective study of ITI dental implants placed in the posterior region. II: Influence of the crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic treatment modalities on crestal bone loss. Clin Oral Impl Res 2007;18:707-714. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Valderrama P, Jones AA, Wilson TG, Higginbottom F, Schoolfield JD, Jung RE, et al. Bone changes around early loaded chemically modified sandblasted and acid-etched surfaced implants with and without a machined collar: a radiographic and resonance frequency analysis in the canine mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:548-557. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Monje A, Suarez F, Galindo-Moreno P, Garcia-Nogales A, Fu J-H, Wang HL. A systematic review on marginal bone loss around short dental implants (< 10 mm) for implant supported fixed prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1119-1124. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cochran DL, Bosshardt DD, Grize L, Higginbottom FL, Jones AA, Jung RE, et al. Bone response to loaded implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters in the canine mandible. J Periodontology 2009;80:609-617. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hartman GA, Cochran DL. Initial implant position determines the magnitude of crestal bone remodeling. J Periodontology 2004; 75:572-577. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:843-848. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Rangert B, Jemt T, Jörneus L. Forces and moments on Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Implants 1989;4:241-247. [Google Scholar]
  21. Bergkvist G, Simonsson K, Rydberg K, Johansson F, Dérand T. A finite element analysis of stress distribution in bone tissue surrounding uncoupled or splinted dental implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008;10:40-46. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Wang IM, Teu LJ, Wang J, Lin LD. Effects of prosthesis materials and prosthesis splinting on peri-implant bone stress around implants in poor quality bone: a numeric analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:231-237. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Smith DE, Zarb GA. Criteria for success of Osseointegrated endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:567-572. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rasmusson L, Kahnberg KE, Tan A. Effects of implant design and surface on bone regeneration and implant stability: an experimental study in the dog mandible. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2001;3:2-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Wyatt CC, Zarb GA. Treatment outcomes of patients with implant-supported fixed partial prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:204-211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Grossmann Y. Indication for splinting implant restorations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;63:1642-1652. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kregzde M. A method of selecting the best implant prosthesis design option using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:662-673. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Guichet DL, Caputo AA, Yoshinobu D, David L. Effect of splinting and interproximal contact tightness on load transfert by implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:528-535. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.