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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12410668)

  • 21. Efficiency of subgingival calculus removal with the Vector-system compared to ultrasonic scaling and hand instrumentation in vitro.
    Braun A; Krause F; Frentzen M; Jepsen S
    J Periodontal Res; 2005 Feb; 40(1):48-52. PubMed ID: 15613079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Scanning electron microscope assessment of several resharpening techniques on the cutting edges of Gracey curettes.
    Andrade Acevedo RA; Cézar Sampaio JE; Shibli JA
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2007 Nov; 8(7):70-7. PubMed ID: 17994157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of four methods of assessing root surface debridement.
    Chan YK; Needleman IG; Clifford LR
    J Periodontol; 2000 Mar; 71(3):385-93. PubMed ID: 10776925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Proof of efficacy of different modified sonic scaler inserts used for debridement in furcations--a dummy head trial.
    Kocher T; Rühling A; Herweg M; Plagman HC
    J Clin Periodontol; 1996 Jul; 23(7):662-9. PubMed ID: 8841899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of the effectiveness of scaling and root planing in vivo using hand vs rotary instruments.
    Dibart S; Capri D; Casavecchia P; Nunn M; Skobe Z
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2004 Aug; 24(4):370-7. PubMed ID: 15446407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Subgingival polishing with a teflon-coated sonic scaler insert in comparison to conventional instruments as assessed on extracted teeth (II). Subgingival roughness.
    Kocher T; Rosin M; Langenbeck N; Bernhardt O
    J Clin Periodontol; 2001 Aug; 28(8):723-9. PubMed ID: 11442731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Clinical comparison of the effectiveness of novel sonic instruments and curettes for periodontal debridement after 2 months.
    Beuchat M; Busslinger A; Schmidlin PR; Michel B; Lehmann B; Lutz F
    J Clin Periodontol; 2001 Dec; 28(12):1145-50. PubMed ID: 11737512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Subgingival debridement of root surfaces with a micro-brush: macroscopic and ultrastructural assessment.
    Carey HM; Daly CG
    J Clin Periodontol; 2001 Sep; 28(9):820-7. PubMed ID: 11493350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Improved efficacy of calculus removal in furcations using ultrasonic diamond-coated inserts.
    Scott JB; Steed-Veilands AM; Yukna RA
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 1999 Aug; 19(4):355-61. PubMed ID: 10709502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Subgingival debridement with a teflon-coated sonic scaler insert in comparison to conventional instruments and assessment of substance removal on extracted teeth.
    Rühling A; Bernhardt O; Kocher T
    Quintessence Int; 2005 Jun; 36(6):446-52. PubMed ID: 15954250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of periodontal pocket penetration by conventional and microultrasonic inserts.
    Clifford LR; Needleman IG; Chan YK
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Feb; 26(2):124-30. PubMed ID: 10048647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Comparison of treatment effect between periodontal subgingival scaling with the special series of ultrasonic inserts and Gracey curette].
    Huang Z; Yu XQ; Zhang L; Shang X; Piao MZ
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2012 Sep; 47(9):513-7. PubMed ID: 23141722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Clinical evaluation of the speed and effectiveness of subgingival calculus removal on single-rooted teeth with diamond-coated ultrasonic tips.
    Yukna RA; Scott JB; Aichelmann-Reidy ME; LeBlanc DM; Mayer ET
    J Periodontol; 1997 May; 68(5):436-42. PubMed ID: 9182738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Loss of tooth substance during root planing with various periodontal instruments: an in vitro study.
    Obeid P; Bercy P
    Clin Oral Investig; 2005 Jun; 9(2):118-23. PubMed ID: 15838684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Advances in power driven pocket/root instrumentation.
    Walmsley AD; Lea SC; Landini G; Moses AJ
    J Clin Periodontol; 2008 Sep; 35(8 Suppl):22-8. PubMed ID: 18724839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Scaling and root planing effectiveness: the effect of root surface access and operator experience.
    Brayer WK; Mellonig JT; Dunlap RM; Marinak KW; Carson RE
    J Periodontol; 1989 Jan; 60(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 2646421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparative in vitro effectiveness of closed root debridement with fine instruments on specific areas of mandibular first molar furcations. II. Furcation area.
    Otero-Cagide FJ; Long BA
    J Periodontol; 1997 Nov; 68(11):1098-101. PubMed ID: 9407403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Removal of root substance with the Vector-system compared with conventional debridement in vitro.
    Braun A; Krause F; Frentzen M; Jepsen S
    J Clin Periodontol; 2005 Feb; 32(2):153-7. PubMed ID: 15691344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effectiveness of different root debridement modalities in open flap surgery.
    Huerzeler MB; Einsele FT; Leupolz M; Kerkhecker U; Strub JR
    J Clin Periodontol; 1998 Mar; 25(3):202-8. PubMed ID: 9543190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A comparative SEM study between hand instrument and Er:YAG laser scaling and root planing.
    Moghare Abed A; Tawakkoli M; Dehchenari MA; Gutknecht N; Mir M
    Lasers Med Sci; 2007 Mar; 22(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 17115236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.