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

162 related items for PubMed ID: 37992138

  • 1. Piezosurgery versus conventional rotary surgery for impacted third molars: A randomised, split-mouth, clinical pilot trial.
    Demirci A, Bayram F, Dergin G.
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2024 Jan 01; 29(1):e1-e8. PubMed ID: 37992138
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. A prospective split-mouth clinical study: comparison of piezosurgery and conventional rotary instruments in impacted third molar surgery.
    Menziletoglu D, Basturk F, Isik BK, Esen A.
    Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2020 Mar 01; 24(1):51-55. PubMed ID: 31811604
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rotary Techniques for Impacted Third Molar Extraction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
    Jiang Q, Qiu Y, Yang C, Yang J, Chen M, Zhang Z.
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2015 Oct 01; 94(41):e1685. PubMed ID: 26469902
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A comparative analysis of postoperative morbidity and alveolar bone regeneration following surgical extraction of ımpacted lower third molar teeth using piezosurgery and conventional ınstruments: a split-mouth clinical ınvestigation.
    Erdem MK, Cambazoglu M.
    Eur J Med Res; 2024 Sep 14; 29(1):460. PubMed ID: 39272144
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Comparative Study of Piezoelectric and Rotary Osteotomy Technique for Third Molar Impaction.
    Basheer SA, Govind RJ, Daniel A, Sam G, Adarsh VJ, Rao A.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2017 Jan 01; 18(1):60-64. PubMed ID: 28050988
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Comparison of postoperative morbidity between piezoelectric surgery and conventional rotary instruments in mandibular third molar surgery: a split-mouth clinical study.
    Gulnahar Y, Alpan AL.
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2021 May 01; 26(3):e269-e275. PubMed ID: 33772570
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Conventional Rotary Technique and Piezosurgical Technique in the Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molar: A Comparative Study.
    Hamza SP, Aslam S, Roshni A, Cherian MP, Soman S, Akhila K.
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2023 Feb 01; 24(2):97-102. PubMed ID: 37272140
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. A Clinical Comparison of Er:YAG Laser, Piezosurgery, and Conventional Bur Methods in the Impacted Third Molar Surgery.
    Genç BGÇ, Orhan K, Or S.
    Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg; 2023 Jun 01; 41(6):283-290. PubMed ID: 37335617
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.
    Coulthard P, Bailey E, Esposito M, Furness S, Renton TF, Worthington HV.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2014 Jul 29; (7):CD004345. PubMed ID: 25069437
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Postoperative evaluation of Er:YAG laser, piezosurgery, and rotary systems used for osteotomy in mandibular third-molar extractions.
    Civak T, Ustun T, Yilmaz HN, Gursoy B.
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2021 Jan 29; 49(1):64-69. PubMed ID: 33298388
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Three-dimensional facial swelling evaluation of piezo-electric vs conventional drilling bur surgery of impacted lower third molar: a randomized clinical trial.
    Caputo A, Rubino E, Marcianò A, Peditto M, Bellocchio AM, Nucera R, Oteri G.
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Apr 21; 23(1):233. PubMed ID: 37085833
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Comparative evaluation of surgical outcome after removal of impacted mandibular third molars using a Piezotome or a conventional handpiece: a prospective study.
    Goyal M, Marya K, Jhamb A, Chawla S, Sonoo PR, Singh V, Aggarwal A.
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Sep 21; 50(6):556-61. PubMed ID: 22088359
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Comparison of clinical parameters and environmental noise levels between regular surgery and piezosurgery for extraction of impacted third molars.
    Chang HH, Lee MS, Hsu YC, Tsai SJ, Lin CP.
    J Formos Med Assoc; 2015 Oct 21; 114(10):929-35. PubMed ID: 24661578
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Effects of platelet-rich fibrin and piezosurgery on impacted mandibular third molar surgery outcomes.
    Uyanık LO, Bilginaylar K, Etikan İ.
    Head Face Med; 2015 Jul 26; 11():25. PubMed ID: 26209242
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. An Evaluation of the Effect of Using Irrigations at Different Temperatures on Pain, Edema, and Trismus during the Extraction of Bilateral Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Split-Mouth Clinical Trial.
    Dayanan C, Ozupek MF, Seyrek NK.
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2023 Dec 01; 26(12):1921-1926. PubMed ID: 38158362
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Piezosurgery or conventional rotatory instruments for inferior third molar extractions?
    Piersanti L, Dilorenzo M, Monaco G, Marchetti C.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Sep 01; 72(9):1647-52. PubMed ID: 25109581
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth.
    Bailey E, Kashbour W, Shah N, Worthington HV, Renton TF, Coulthard P.
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2020 Jul 26; 7(7):CD004345. PubMed ID: 32712962
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Piezosurgery Versus Conventional Osteotomy: A Comparison of Techniques in the Extraction of Unerupted Mandibular Third Molars in Children.
    Yang L, Chen Y, Fang W.
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2022 Jun 26; 80(6):1078-1083. PubMed ID: 35300957
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 9.