125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14586848)
1. Ultrasound: assessment of the distraction osteogenesis wound in patients undergoing mandibular lengthening.
Troulis MJ; Coppe C; O'Neill MJ; Kaban LB
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2003 Oct; 61(10):1144-9. PubMed ID: 14586848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Use of ultrasound to assess healing of a mandibular distraction wound.
Thurmüller P; Troulis M; O'Neill MJ; Kaban LB
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2002 Sep; 60(9):1038-44. PubMed ID: 12215991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative evaluation of the mandibular distraction zone using ultrasonography and conventional radiography.
Issar Y; Sahoo NK; Sinha R; Satija L; Chattopadhyay PK
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 May; 43(5):587-94. PubMed ID: 24393569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessment of bone formation in a porcine mandibular distraction wound by computed tomography.
Zimmermann CE; Harris G; Thurmüller P; Troulis MJ; Perrott DH; Rahn B; Kaban LB
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2004 Sep; 33(6):569-74. PubMed ID: 15308257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Low-level laser effect on mandibular distraction osteogenesis.
Miloro M; Miller JJ; Stoner JA
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2007 Feb; 65(2):168-76. PubMed ID: 17236917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of distracted mandibular bone using computed tomography scan and ultrasonography: technical note.
Selim H; Elbargothy N; Nabil Y; El-Hakim I
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Jul; 38(5):274-80. PubMed ID: 19474254
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability of panoramic radiographs for the assessment of mandibular elongation after distraction osteogenesis procedures.
Hazan-Molina H; Molina-Hazan V; Schendel SA; Aizenbud D
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2011 Feb; 14(1):25-32. PubMed ID: 21205166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Gray-scale ultrasonography in the evaluation of bone callus in distraction osteogenesis of the mandible: initial findings.
Bruno C; Minniti S; Buttura-da-Prato E; Albanese M; Nocini PF; Pozzi-Mucelli R
Eur Radiol; 2008 May; 18(5):1012-7. PubMed ID: 18224324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Distraction osteogenesis of the porcine mandible: histomorphometric evaluation of bone.
Glowacki J; Shusterman EM; Troulis M; Holmes R; Perrott D; Kaban LB
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Feb; 113(2):566-73. PubMed ID: 14758219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. To determine the efficacy of ultrasonography in the evaluation of bone fill at the regenerate site for mandibular distraction osteogenesis over clinical and radiographic assessment- An in vivo prospective study.
Andrade N; Aggrawal N; Jadhav G; Sahu V; Mathai PC
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res; 2018; 8(2):89-93. PubMed ID: 29892528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Correlation of biomechanical stiffness with plain radiographic and ultrasound data in an experimental mandibular distraction wound.
Kaban LB; Thurmüller P; Troulis MJ; Glowacki J; Wahl D; Linke B; Rahn B; Perrott DH
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2003 Jun; 32(3):296-304. PubMed ID: 12767878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mandibular advancement by distraction osteogenesis for tracheostomy-dependent children with severe micrognathia.
Steinbacher DM; Kaban LB; Troulis MJ
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2005 Aug; 63(8):1072-9. PubMed ID: 16094571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Histomorphometric analysis of the porcine mandibular distraction wound.
Lawler ME; Tayebaty FT; Williams WB; Troulis MJ; Kaban LB
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Jul; 68(7):1543-54. PubMed ID: 20561467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Intraoral mandibular distraction: indications, technique and long-term results.
Diner PA; Tomat C; Soupre V; Martinez H; Vazquez MP
Ann Acad Med Singap; 1999 Sep; 28(5):634-41. PubMed ID: 10597346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Mineralization dynamics of regenerate bone during mandibular osteodistraction.
Cope JB; Samchukov ML
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2001 Jun; 30(3):234-42. PubMed ID: 11420907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Bilateral mandibular distraction in adult dogs with an epiperiosteal distractor.
Hasse AR; Pörksen M; Zimmermann CE
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2005 Apr; 43(2):105-12. PubMed ID: 15749209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Experimental evaluation of the effects of zoledronic acid on regenerate bone formation and osteoporosis in mandibular distraction osteogenesis.
Pampu AA; Dolanmaz D; Tüz HH; Karabacakoglu A
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2006 Aug; 64(8):1232-6. PubMed ID: 16860215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The evolution of mandibular distraction: device selection.
Davidson EH; Brown D; Shetye PR; Greig AVH; Grayson BH; Warren SM; McCarthy JG
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2010 Dec; 126(6):2061-2070. PubMed ID: 20697312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Distraction rate and latency: factors in the outcome of pediatric mandibular distraction.
Hollier LH; Higuera S; Stal S; Taylor TD
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2006 Jun; 117(7):2333-6. PubMed ID: 16772939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Curvilinear mandibular distraction results and long-term stability effects in a group of 40 patients.
Aizenbud D; Hazan-Molina H; Thimmappa B; Hopkins EM; Schendel SA
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2010 Jun; 125(6):1771-1780. PubMed ID: 20517103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
