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

209 related items for PubMed ID: 8636498

  • 1. An in vitro comparative study of a reciprocating scaler for root surface debridement.
    Lee A, Heasman PA, Kelly PJ.
    J Dent; 1996; 24(1-2):81-6. PubMed ID: 8636498
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Comparative in vitro studies of sonic, ultrasonic and reciprocating scaling instruments.
    Jotikasthira NE, Lie T, Leknes KN.
    J Clin Periodontol; 1992 Sep; 19(8):560-9. PubMed ID: 1447381
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. A comparative scanning electron microscopy study between the effect of an ultrasonic scaler, reciprocating handpiece, and combined approach on the root surface topography in subgingival debridement.
    Dassatti L, Manicone PF, Lauricella S, Pastorino R, Filetici P, Nicoletti F, D'Addona A.
    Clin Exp Dent Res; 2020 Aug; 6(4):470-477. PubMed ID: 32573120
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Preservation of root cementum: a comparative evaluation of power-driven versus hand instruments.
    Bozbay E, Dominici F, Gokbuget AY, Cintan S, Guida L, Aydin MS, Mariotti A, Pilloni A.
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2018 May; 16(2):202-209. PubMed ID: 27860247
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using manual, ultrasonic and rotary instruments: an in vitro study using scanning electron microscopy.
    Marda P, Prakash S, Devaraj CG, Vastardis S.
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012 May; 23(2):164-70. PubMed ID: 22945704
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using two piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers and a hand scaler in vivo.
    Kawashima H, Sato S, Kishida M, Ito K.
    J Periodontal Res; 2007 Feb; 42(1):90-5. PubMed ID: 17214645
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Er:YAG laser scaling of diseased root surfaces.
    Frentzen M, Braun A, Aniol D.
    J Periodontol; 2002 May; 73(5):524-30. PubMed ID: 12027255
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Subgingival polishing with a teflon-coated sonic scaler insert in comparison to conventional instruments as assessed on extracted teeth. (I) Residual deposits.
    Kocher T, Langenbeck M, Rühling A, Plagmann HC.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2000 Apr; 27(4):243-9. PubMed ID: 10783837
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Comparative study on the effect of ultrasonic instruments on the root surface in vivo.
    Santos FA, Pochapski MT, Leal PC, Gimenes-Sakima PP, Marcantonio E.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2008 Jun; 12(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 18060565
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Clinical evaluation of the speed and effectiveness of subgingival calculus removal on single-rooted teeth with diamond-coated ultrasonic tips.
    Yukna RA, Scott JB, Aichelmann-Reidy ME, LeBlanc DM, Mayer ET.
    J Periodontol; 1997 May; 68(5):436-42. PubMed ID: 9182738
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. A comparative in vitro study of a magnetostrictive and a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling instrument.
    Busslinger A, Lampe K, Beuchat M, Lehmann B.
    J Clin Periodontol; 2001 Jul; 28(7):642-9. PubMed ID: 11422585
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Evaluation of root surface microtopography following the use of four instrumentation systems by confocal microscopy and scanning electron microscopy: an in vitro study.
    Solís Moreno C, Santos A, Nart J, Levi P, Velásquez A, Sanz Moliner J.
    J Periodontal Res; 2012 Oct; 47(5):608-15. PubMed ID: 22494068
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments--an in vitro profilometric and SEM study.
    Singh S, Uppoor A, Nayak D.
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2012 Feb; 20(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 22437673
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Comparative effectiveness of ultrasonic and hand scaling for the removal of subgingival plaque and calculus.
    Breininger DR, O'Leary TJ, Blumenshine RV.
    J Periodontol; 1987 Jan; 58(1):9-18. PubMed ID: 3543285
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. The effect of the angle of instrumentation of the Piezoelectric Ultrasonic Scaler on root surfaces.
    Oliveira G, Macedo PD, Tsurumaki JN, Sampaio JE, Marcantonio R.
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2016 Aug; 14(3):184-90. PubMed ID: 25690687
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Effects of a new ultrasonic scaler on fibroblast attachment to root surfaces: a scanning electron microscopy analysis.
    Kishida M, Sato S, Ito K.
    J Periodontal Res; 2004 Apr; 39(2):111-9. PubMed ID: 15009519
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Histological and profilometric evaluation of the root surface after instrumentation with a new piezoelectric device - ex vivo study.
    Silva D, Martins O, Matos S, Lopes P, Rolo T, Baptista I.
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2015 May; 13(2):138-44. PubMed ID: 24995862
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Loss of tooth substance during root planing with various periodontal instruments: an in vitro study.
    Obeid P, Bercy P.
    Clin Oral Investig; 2005 Jun; 9(2):118-23. PubMed ID: 15838684
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Comparison of the effects of various periodontal rotary instruments on surface characteristics of root surface.
    Kishida M, Sato S, Ito K.
    J Oral Sci; 2004 Mar; 46(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 15141717
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Root instrumentation. Power-driven versus manual scalers, which one?
    Drisko CH.
    Dent Clin North Am; 1998 Apr; 42(2):229-44. PubMed ID: 9597335
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.