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

Kozakiewicz, Marcin

  • Google
  • 3
  • 8
  • 110

Medical University of Lodz

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (3/3 displayed)

  • 2021Custom-Made Zirconium Dioxide Implants for Craniofacial Bone Reconstruction8citations
  • 2021Printable and Machinable Dental Restorative Composites for CAD/CAM Application - Comparison of Mechanical Properties, Fractographic, Texture and Fractal Dimension Analysis79citations
  • 2017Two different techniques of manufacturing TMJ replacements - a technical report23citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Kowalewski, Piotr
1 / 6 shared
Grzebieluch, Wojciech
1 / 2 shared
Jurczyszyn, Kamil
1 / 1 shared
Grygier, Dominika
1 / 3 shared
Rutkowska-Gorczyca, Małgorzata
1 / 3 shared
Wach, Tomasz
1 / 1 shared
Zieliński, Rafał
1 / 2 shared
Szymor, Piotr
1 / 1 shared
Chart of publication period
2021
2017

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Kowalewski, Piotr
  • Grzebieluch, Wojciech
  • Jurczyszyn, Kamil
  • Grygier, Dominika
  • Rutkowska-Gorczyca, Małgorzata
  • Wach, Tomasz
  • Zieliński, Rafał
  • Szymor, Piotr
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Custom-Made Zirconium Dioxide Implants for Craniofacial Bone Reconstruction

  • Kozakiewicz, Marcin
Abstract

Reconstruction of the facial skeleton is challenging for surgeons because of difficulties in proper shape restoration and maintenance of the proper long-term effect. ZrO2 implant application can be a solution with many advantages (e.g., osseointegration, stability, and radio-opaqueness) and lacks the disadvantages of other biomaterials (e.g., metalosis, radiotransparency, and no osseointegration) or autologous bone (e.g., morbidity, resorption, and low accuracy). We aimed to evaluate the possibility of using ZrO2 implants as a new application of this material for craniofacial bone defect reconstruction. First, osteoblast (skeleton-related cell) cytotoxicity and genotoxicity were determined in vitro by comparing ZrO2 implants and alumina particle air-abraded ZrO2 implants to the following: 1. a titanium alloy (standard material); 2. ultrahigh-molecular-weight polyethylene (a modern material used in orbital surgery); 3. a negative control (minimally cytotoxic or genotoxic agent action); 4. a positive control (maximally cytotoxic or genotoxic agent action). Next, 14 custom in vivo clinical ZrO2 implants were manufactured for post-traumatologic periorbital region reconstruction. The soft tissue position improvement in photogrammetry was recorded, and clinical follow-up was conducted at least 6 years postoperatively. All the investigated materials revealed no cytotoxicity. Alumina particle air-abraded ZrO2 implants showed genotoxicity compared to those without subjection to air abrasion ZrO2, which were not genotoxic. The 6-month and 6- to 8-year clinical results were aesthetic and stable. Skeleton reconstructions using osseointegrated, radio-opaque, personalized implants comprising ZrO2 material are the next option for craniofacial surgery.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • zirconium
  • defect
  • titanium
  • titanium alloy
  • biomaterials
  • zirconium dioxide