629 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9526912)
1. Mucogingival versus guided tissue regeneration procedures in the treatment of deep recession type defects.
Zucchelli G; Clauser C; De Sanctis M; Calandriello M
J Periodontol; 1998 Feb; 69(2):138-45. PubMed ID: 9526912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Treatment of gingival recessions by combined periodontal regenerative technique, guided tissue regeneration, and subpedicle connective tissue graft. A comparative clinical study.
Paolantonio M
J Periodontol; 2002 Jan; 73(1):53-62. PubMed ID: 11846201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Coronally positioned flap procedures with or without a bioabsorbable membrane in the treatment of human gingival recession.
Amarante ES; Leknes KN; Skavland J; Lie T
J Periodontol; 2000 Jun; 71(6):989-98. PubMed ID: 10914803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparative clinical study of a bioabsorbable membrane and subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of human gingival recession.
Borghetti A; Glise JM; Monnet-Corti V; Dejou J
J Periodontol; 1999 Feb; 70(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 10102549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Guided tissue regeneration versus mucogingival surgery in the treatment of human buccal gingival recession.
Pini Prato G; Tinti C; Vincenzi G; Magnani C; Cortellini P; Clauser C
J Periodontol; 1992 Nov; 63(11):919-28. PubMed ID: 1453307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of 2 clinical techniques for treatment of gingival recession.
Wang HL; Bunyaratavej P; Labadie M; Shyr Y; MacNeil RL
J Periodontol; 2001 Oct; 72(10):1301-11. PubMed ID: 11699470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparative clinical study of guided tissue regeneration with a bioabsorbable bilayer collagen membrane and subepithelial connective tissue graft.
Romagna-Genon C
J Periodontol; 2001 Sep; 72(9):1258-64. PubMed ID: 11577960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Gingival recession treatment: guided tissue regeneration with bioabsorbable membrane versus connective tissue graft.
Tatakis DN; Trombelli L
J Periodontol; 2000 Feb; 71(2):299-307. PubMed ID: 10711621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Enamel matrix proteins and guided tissue regeneration with titanium-reinforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membranes in the treatment of infrabony defects: a comparative controlled clinical trial.
Zucchelli G; Bernardi F; Montebugnoli L; De SM
J Periodontol; 2002 Jan; 73(1):3-12. PubMed ID: 11846197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Failure of root coverage of shallow gingival recessions employing GTR and a bioresorbable membrane.
Müller HP; Stahl M; Eger T
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2001 Apr; 21(2):171-81. PubMed ID: 11829391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Development and clinical evaluation of a root coverage procedure using a collagen barrier membrane.
Shieh AT; Wang HL; O'Neal R; Glickman GN; MacNeil RL
J Periodontol; 1997 Aug; 68(8):770-8. PubMed ID: 9287069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Treatment of gingival recession using a collagen membrane with or without the use of demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft for space maintenance.
Kimble KM; Eber RM; Soehren S; Shyr Y; Wang HL
J Periodontol; 2004 Feb; 75(2):210-20. PubMed ID: 15068108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of 2 techniques of subepithelial connective tissue graft in the treatment of gingival recessions.
Cordioli G; Mortarino C; Chierico A; Grusovin MG; Majzoub Z
J Periodontol; 2001 Nov; 72(11):1470-6. PubMed ID: 11759857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A comparison of 2 root coverage techniques: guided tissue regeneration with a bioabsorbable matrix style membrane versus a connective tissue graft combined with a coronally positioned pedicle graft without vertical incisions. results of a series of consecutive cases.
Harris RJ
J Periodontol; 1998 Dec; 69(12):1426-34. PubMed ID: 9926774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Treatment of gingival recession: comparative study between subepithelial connective tissue graft and guided tissue regeneration.
Rosetti EP; Marcantonio RA; Rossa C; Chaves ES; Goissis G; Marcantonio E
J Periodontol; 2000 Sep; 71(9):1441-7. PubMed ID: 11022773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A clinical/statistical comparison between the subpedicle connective tissue graft method and the guided tissue regeneration technique in root coverage.
Ricci G; Silvestri M; Tinti C; Rasperini G
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 1996 Dec; 16(6):538-45. PubMed ID: 9242092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Root coverage: comparison of coronally positioned flap with and without titanium-reinforced barrier membrane.
Lins LH; de Lima AF; Sallum AW
J Periodontol; 2003 Feb; 74(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 12666704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of human recession defects treated with coronally advanced flaps and either enamel matrix derivative or connective tissue. Part 1: Comparison of clinical parameters.
McGuire MK; Nunn M
J Periodontol; 2003 Aug; 74(8):1110-25. PubMed ID: 14514224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparative clinical study of connective tissue graft and two types of bioabsorbable barriers in the treatment of localized gingival recessions.
Cetiner D; Parlar A; Baloş K; Alpar R
J Periodontol; 2003 Aug; 74(8):1196-205. PubMed ID: 14514234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Treatment of gingival recession with titanium reinforced barrier membranes versus connective tissue grafts.
Jepsen K; Heinz B; Halben JH; Jepsen S
J Periodontol; 1998 Mar; 69(3):383-91. PubMed ID: 9579626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
