Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Serial Extraction”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
PubMed1978

Timed extractions.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cephalometry↗
PubMed1991

Immunoblot multi-allergen inhibition studies of allergenic cross-reactivity of the dust mites Lepidoglyphus destructor and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus.

The allergenic similarity of the pyroglyphid mite D. pteronyssinus and the glycyphagid mite L. destructor was investigated with a new immunoblotting inhibition technique allowing simultaneous comparison of several allergens. Extracts of D. pteronyssinus and L. destructor were separated by SDS-PAGE and electroblotted to nitrocellulose (NC). A serum pool containing IgE specific to the major allergens in both mites was mixed with serially diluted extracts of D. pteronyssinus and L. destructor and incubated with the mite allergens of NC. The inhibition of the IgE binding to NC was evaluated by densitometric scanning and percentage inhibition was calculated. The IgE antibodies to the 25-kD component in D. pteronyssinus, were inhibited to the same degree by extracts of D. pteronyssinus and L. destructor. Another major allergen component in D. pteronyssinus (16 kD) was also inhibited by L. destructor extract but to a lesser degree: 400 times more of the heterologous than of the homologous extract was needed for 50% inhibition. To produce 50% of heterologous inhibition of the two major allergen components at 15 and 53 kD of L. destructor, 2000 and 10,000 times more respectively, of D. pteronyssinus than of L. destructor extract were needed. Two minor allergen components of L. destructor showed some cross-reactivity with D. pteronyssinus. However, L. destructor was a stronger inhibitor of D. pteronyssinus than vice versa, probably because the sera were obtained from persons more sensitized to L. destructor than to D. pteronyssinus.

Allergens↗
PubMed1992

[Extraction versus non-extraction. Does the pendulum swing too much?].

Therapeutic extractions in Orthodontics has decreased in the last few years. The idea of that early treatment, functional appliances, upper molar and bicuspids distal movements, upper sagittal suture opening and other proceedings, reduce extraction practice is widely extended. Unfavorable effects like facial profile worsening and TMJ problems has been related to extractions. In this study common arguments against extractions has been analysed and attacked. Some cases are presented to illustrate non-extraction reliability. Main conclusions are: there is not relationship between extraction and TMJ dysfunctions; profile changes depend on technique not on extractions "per se"; profile gets better in alveolar prognatisms; non-extraction tendency rely most on some viewpoints away from biologic facts than clinical evidences.

Child↗
PubMed1982

Extraction of third molars in cases of anticipated crowding in the lower jaw.

The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether the lower third molar, in combination with other variables such as facial morphology and space conditions, can contribute to the occurrence or aggravation of crowding. The subjects consisted of twenty-three boys and twenty-nine girls with impacted third molars on both sides of the mandible. The impacted molar on one side was removed, while the other, nonextracted side was used as a control. Average age at the time of operation was 15.5 years (range, 13 to 19). Close to the operation and annually for at least 3 years afterward, study casts and cephalograms (lateral, frontal, and oblique) were taken. The findings indicated that (1) despite analyses of many variables, this study has not been able to predict which patients should react favorably or unfavorably to removal of the third lower molars in cases of anticipated crowding; (2) in cases with severe crowding removal of the molars could be recommended; (3) correct proximal contacts seem to be of importance in keeping the space that is achieved by extraction, while incorrect ones may spoil it.

Adolescent↗