1.A clinical study on industrial hand injury(II).
Hyeung Gyo SEO ; Byeung Il LEE ; Seung Ha PARK ; Woo Kyung KIM ; Chun Eun CHUNG
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1991;18(1):153-160
No abstract available.
Hand*
2.Resurfacing of the hand using free temporoparietal fascial flap.
Young Seob LEE ; Yang Woo KIM ; Byung Hoon RYU
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1992;19(2):252-257
No abstract available.
Hand*
3.A Case of Hand Schuller Christian Disease.
Yeon Saeng LEE ; Soo Young KIM ; So Kyung PARK ; Dong Hak SHIN
Journal of the Korean Pediatric Society 1983;26(4):392-396
No abstract available.
Hand*
4.Segmental Hemihyperplasia-Related Macrodactyly with Congenital Renal Agenesis: A Hand Surgeon's Point of View.
Joao Nunes DA COSTA ; Julio MATIAS
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2015;42(5):655-658
No abstract available.
Hand*
5.Wide Awake Hand Surgery.
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2017;44(4):348-348
No abstract available.
Hand*
6.Management of hand degloving injuries with sandwich flaps.
Jae Deok KIM ; sung Pill CHO ; Ki Taek HAN ; Sung Shin WEE
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1993;20(4):868-874
No abstract available.
Hand*
7.Syringoid Eccrine Carcinoma on the Dorsum of Hand.
Sun Yong KWON ; Ui Kyung KIM ; Hyun Min NAM ; Keum Ha CHOI ; Kun PARK ; Seok Don PARK
Korean Journal of Dermatology 2012;50(8):755-758
No abstract available.
Hand
8.EXPLOSIVE INJURY OF THE HAND.
Sun Shik SHIN ; Hyun Chul PARK ; Suk Ki LEE ; Koung Tae BAE ; Kwnag Shik KOOK ; Sung Ki KIM
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1997;24(5):1139-1144
No abstract available.
Hand*
9.LENGTHENING OF SHORT TUBULAR BONE IN HAND.
O Hyun HWANG ; Jun Sik KIM ; Jae Woo PARK ; Seong Geun PARK ; Young Hwan KIM ; Hae Rong SONG
Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 1997;24(5):1100-1109
No abstract available.
Hand*
10.A comparison of the shaping ability of reciprocating NiTi instruments in simulated curved canals.
Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics 2012;37(4):220-227
OBJECTIVES: The study was to compare the shaping ability of Reciproc (VDW) and WaveOne (Dentsply Maillefer) instruments compared with ProTaper, Profile and hand instrument during the preparation of simulated root canals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five groups (n = 5) were established. Reciproc, WaveOne, ProTaper, Profile and K file (K-flexo file) were used to prepare the resin simulated canals. A series of preoperative and postoperative images were taken by a microscope and superimposed in 2 different layers. The amount of resin removed from both the inner and the outer sides of the canal was measured to the level of 10 mm from the apical tip, with a 1 mm increment. RESULTS: The mean of resin removal from the inner canal wall was not different from the outer canal wall for Reciproc and WaveOne groups at apical third (1 - 3 mm level). There was no difference in the change of working length and maintenance of canal curvature. NiTi instruments are superior to stainless-steel K file in their shaping ability. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitation of this present study, Reciproc and WaveOne instruments maintained the original canal curvature in curved canals better than ProTaper and Profile, which tend to transport towards the outer canal wall of the curve in the apical part of the canal.
Hand
Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail