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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

141 related items for PubMed ID: 12087243

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Mandibular lengthening with an implanted motor-driven device: preliminary study in sheep.
    Ploder O, Mayr W, Schnetz G, Unger E, Ewers R, Plenk H.
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 1999 Aug; 37(4):273-6. PubMed ID: 10475648
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. [Distraction osteogenesis with a fully implantable system. Experimental study].
    Ploder O, Mayr W, Schnetz G, Unger E, Plenk H, Losert U, Ewers R.
    Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir; 1999 May; 3 Suppl 1():S140-3. PubMed ID: 10414101
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Does the sheep mandible relapse following lengthening by distraction osteogenesis?
    McTavish J, Marucci DD, Bonar SF, Walsh WR, Poole MD.
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2000 Oct; 28(5):251-7. PubMed ID: 11467387
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Development of distraction osteogenesis model of the inferior mandibular border and alveolar bone.
    Moon HS, Kim HJ, Teribish M, Park JT, Cha JY.
    J Craniofac Surg; 2011 Mar; 22(2):715-9. PubMed ID: 21415642
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Comparison of canine mandibular bone regeneration by distraction osteogenesis versus acute resection and rigid external fixation.
    Gosain AK, Kalantarian B, Song LS, Larson JD, Jenkins CA, Wilson CR.
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Nov; 114(6):1490-9; discussion 1500-1. PubMed ID: 15509937
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Distraction osteogenesis of the mandible with a modified intraoral appliance: a pilot study in miniature pigs.
    Holzhauer DP, Larsen PE, Miloro M, Vig KW.
    Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1998 Nov; 13(3):241-7. PubMed ID: 9835823
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Induced osteogenesis by periosteal distraction.
    Schmidt BL, Kung L, Jones C, Casap N.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2002 Oct; 60(10):1170-5. PubMed ID: 12378493
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. The role of latency in mandibular osteodistraction.
    Tavakoli K, Walsh WR, Bonar F, Smart R, Wulf S, Poole MD.
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 1998 Aug; 26(4):209-19. PubMed ID: 9777499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Primary study of the use of an internal, self-activated shape memory alloy distraction device in the dog mandible: alveolar ridge distraction and implant placement.
    Xie M, Hu M, Liu H, Xiao H.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 Jul; 69(7):2033-9. PubMed ID: 21316135
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Mandibular distraction osteogenesis. Preliminary results of an animal study with a dentally fixed distraction device.
    Braumann B, Niederhagen B, Schmolke C.
    J Orofac Orthop; 1997 Jul; 58(6):298-305. PubMed ID: 9433049
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Intraoral widening and lengthening of the mandible in baboons by distraction osteogenesis.
    Bell WH, Gonzalez M, Samchukov ML, Guerrero CA.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 1999 May; 57(5):548-62; discussion 563. PubMed ID: 10319829
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. [Dental assisted distraction osteogenesis of the mandible. Results of an animal experimental study and initial clinical application].
    Braumann B, Niederhagen B, Schmolke C, von Lindern JJ.
    Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir; 1999 Jan; 3(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 10077960
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Distraction osteogenesis of free interpositional membranous bone: experimental design.
    Cho BC, Lee JH, Baik BS, Liou EJ, Figueroa AA, Cohen M.
    J Craniofac Surg; 1999 Mar; 10(2):123-7; discussion 128. PubMed ID: 10388412
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on bone formation during mandible distraction osteogenesis in a canine model--a preliminary study.
    Ding Y, Li G, Zhang X, Ao J, Liu W, Ma Q, Liu Y, Liu B.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Nov; 67(11):2431-9. PubMed ID: 19837313
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Effects of latency on the quality and quantity of bone produced by dentoalveolar distraction osteogenesis.
    Moore C, Campbell PM, Dechow PC, Ellis ML, Buschang PH.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Oct; 140(4):470-8. PubMed ID: 21967933
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. "Pumping the regenerate": an evaluation of oscillating distraction osteogenesis in the rodent mandible.
    Greenwald JA, Luchs JS, Mehrara BJ, Spector JA, Mackool RJ, McCarthy JG, Longaker MT.
    Ann Plast Surg; 2000 May; 44(5):516-21. PubMed ID: 10805303
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. How does the rate of dentoalveolar distraction affect the bone regenerate produced?
    Spencer AC, Campbell PM, Dechow P, Ellis ML, Buschang PH.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Nov; 140(5):e211-21. PubMed ID: 22051499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.