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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19889486)

  • 1. Comparison of different harvesting methods from the flat and long bones of rats.
    von See C; Rücker M; Kampmann A; Kokemüller H; Bormann KH; Gellrich NC
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Dec; 48(8):607-12. PubMed ID: 19889486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Morphology of bone particles after harvesting with 4 different devices.
    Papadimitriou DE; Schmidt EC; Caton JG; Romanos GE
    Implant Dent; 2013 Apr; 22(2):187-92. PubMed ID: 23344367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A novel bone scraper for intraoral harvesting: a device for filling small bone defects.
    Zaffe D; D'Avenia F
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2007 Aug; 18(4):525-33. PubMed ID: 17441981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of implant drill design on the particle size of the bone collected during osteotomy.
    Park SY; Shin SY; Yang SM; Kye SB
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Oct; 39(10):1007-11. PubMed ID: 20566268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Autogenous bone chips: influence of a new piezoelectric device (Piezosurgery) on chip morphology, cell viability and differentiation.
    Chiriac G; Herten M; Schwarz F; Rothamel D; Becker J
    J Clin Periodontol; 2005 Sep; 32(9):994-9. PubMed ID: 16104964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance of six bone collectors designed for dental implant surgery.
    Kainulainen VT; Kainulainen TJ; Oikarinen KS; Carmichael RP; Sàndor GK
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2006 Jun; 17(3):282-7. PubMed ID: 16672023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of bone harvesting techniques on cell viability and the release of growth factors of autografts.
    Miron RJ; Gruber R; Hedbom E; Saulacic N; Zhang Y; Sculean A; Bosshardt DD; Buser D
    Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2013 Aug; 15(4):481-9. PubMed ID: 22375920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A novel drilling procedure and subsequent bone autograft preparation: a technical note.
    Anitua E; Carda C; Andia I
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2007; 22(1):138-45. PubMed ID: 17340908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of graft cell viability-efficacy of piezoelectric versus manual bone scraper technique.
    Pekovits K; Wildburger A; Payer M; Hutter H; Jakse N; Dohr G
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Jan; 70(1):154-62. PubMed ID: 22014939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Osteogenic potential of autogenous bone grafts harvested with four different surgical techniques.
    Miron RJ; Hedbom E; Saulacic N; Zhang Y; Sculean A; Bosshardt DD; Buser D
    J Dent Res; 2011 Dec; 90(12):1428-33. PubMed ID: 21940523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Influence of harvesting technique and donor site location on in vitro growth of osteoblastlike cells from facial bone.
    Pradel W; Tenbieg P; Lauer G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2005; 20(6):860-6. PubMed ID: 16392342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of bone marrow cells harvested from various bones of cynomolgus monkeys at various ages by perfusion or aspiration methods: a preclinical study for human BMT.
    Kushida T; Inaba M; Ikebukuro K; Ichioka N; Esumi T; Oyaizu H; Yoshimura T; Nagahama T; Nakamura K; Ito T; Hisha H; Sugiura K; Yasumizu R; Iida H; Ikehara S
    Stem Cells; 2002; 20(2):155-62. PubMed ID: 11897872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Bone regeneration following the implantation of osteoblasts from cell cultures].
    Lang H; Mertens T; Gerlach KL
    Dtsch Z Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir; 1990; 14(3):224-8. PubMed ID: 2102437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Histomorphometric evaluation of bone grafts harvested by different methods.
    Berengo M; Bacci C; Sartori M; Perini A; Della Barbera M; Valente M
    Minerva Stomatol; 2006 Apr; 55(4):189-98. PubMed ID: 16618993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bilateral vascularized femoral bone transplant: a new model of vascularized bone marrow transplantation in rats, part I.
    Agaoglu G; Carnevale KA; Zins JE; Siemionow M
    Ann Plast Surg; 2006 Jun; 56(6):658-64. PubMed ID: 16721081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Inferior alveolar nerve transposition--an in vitro comparison between piezosurgery and conventional bur use.
    Metzger MC; Bormann KH; Schoen R; Gellrich NC; Schmelzeisen R
    J Oral Implantol; 2006; 32(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 16526578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bacterial contamination levels of autogenous bone particles collected by 3 different techniques for harvesting intraoral bone grafts.
    Manzano-Moreno FJ; Herrera-Briones FJ; Linares-Recatala M; Ocaña-Peinado FM; Reyes-Botella C; Vallecillo-Capilla MF
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2015 Mar; 73(3):424-9. PubMed ID: 25683043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Manual punch versus power harvesting of osteochondral grafts.
    Evans PJ; Miniaci A; Hurtig MB
    Arthroscopy; 2004 Mar; 20(3):306-10. PubMed ID: 15007320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Micromorphometrical analysis of conventional osteotomy techniques and ultrasonic osteotomy at the rabbit skull.
    Maurer P; Kriwalsky MS; Block Veras R; Vogel J; Syrowatka F; Heiss C
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 2008 Jun; 19(6):570-5. PubMed ID: 18474063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The mandibular retromolar area as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting: surgical notes.
    Fakhry A
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2011 Jun; 31(3):275-83. PubMed ID: 21556384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.