Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Nakano, Leonardo Jiro Nomura

  • Google
  • 1
  • 6
  • 12

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2022Biomechanical evaluation of 3-unit fixed partial dentures on monotype and two-piece zirconia dental implants12citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Jpm, Tribst
1 / 88 shared
Vasconcelos, John Eversong Lucena De
1 / 1 shared
Lopes, Guilherme Da Rocha Scalzer
1 / 5 shared
Ramos, Nathália De Carvalho
1 / 8 shared
Matos, Jefferson David Melo De
1 / 3 shared
Bottino, M. A.
1 / 25 shared
Chart of publication period
2022

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Jpm, Tribst
  • Vasconcelos, John Eversong Lucena De
  • Lopes, Guilherme Da Rocha Scalzer
  • Ramos, Nathália De Carvalho
  • Matos, Jefferson David Melo De
  • Bottino, M. A.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Biomechanical evaluation of 3-unit fixed partial dentures on monotype and two-piece zirconia dental implants

  • Jpm, Tribst
  • Vasconcelos, John Eversong Lucena De
  • Lopes, Guilherme Da Rocha Scalzer
  • Ramos, Nathália De Carvalho
  • Matos, Jefferson David Melo De
  • Bottino, M. A.
  • Nakano, Leonardo Jiro Nomura
Abstract

<p>This study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical behavior, stress distributions and bone microstrain of fixed partial dentures (FPD) with ceramic abutments supported on monotype zirconia implants, titanium implants and two-piece zirconia implants, using finite element analysis. A three-dimensional model of the jaw was simulated containing 1.0 mm thick cortical bone and cancellous bone tissue. A FPD and implant models (4.1 x 10 mm) were modeled containing a cement-retained implant abutment. These models were replicated in three groups with similar geometries: Titanium Implant and Zirconia Abutment (Ti-Zr); Zirconia Implant and Zirconia Abutment (Zr-Zr) and Monotype Zirconia Implant (Zr-S). An axial load of 300 N was applied to the center of the first premolar. The microstrain (με) and the Von-Mises stress (MPa) were assumed as failures criteria. For the three groups, a higher stress concentration was observed in the region of FPD connectors. The Ti-Zr group showed a higher stress concentration in the prosthesis and implant when compared to the other groups. However, the smaller elastic modulus of the titanium implant, in relation to the zirconia, provided a lower stress in the abutment and in the prosthetic screw. The monotype implant system allowed a more homogeneous stress distribution and its strain were predominantly located in the cervical region of the peri-implant bone tissue. Monotype or two-piece zirconia implants can be used for rehabilitation with FPD. However, the absence of separation between implant and abutment in the monotype system avoids the stress concentration in the prosthetic screw and reduced the peri-implant bone strain.</p>

Topics
  • cement
  • titanium
  • ceramic
  • finite element analysis