Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

Attention, ce site est en cours de développement !
Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts.
Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures

Identifieur interne : 000224 ( PascalFrancis/Curation ); précédent : 000223; suivant : 000225

A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures

Auteurs : Matthew J. Madsen [États-Unis] ; Richard H. Haug [États-Unis]

Source :

RBID : Pascal:06-0170065

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical behavior of 2 techniques for the reconstruction of atrophic edentulous mandible fractures. Materials and Methods: Thirty polyurethane atrophic edentulous mandible replicas (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA) were used in this investigation (10 controls, 10 replicas of 2 different fixation techniques). The first reconstruction technique was a traditional titanium locking reconstruction plate affixed to the lateral border (buccal surface) of the mandible. The second reconstruction technique used the same type of plate, but placed it on the inferior border of the mandible. Both constructs were subjected to vertical loading at the symphysis and torsional loading at the body regions of the mandible replicas by an Instron 1331 (Instron, Canton, MA) servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. Mechanical deformation data within a 0 -900 N range were recorded. Maximum load, displacement at maximum load, and stiffness were determined. Means and standard deviations were derived and compared for statistical significance using a Fisher's Protected Least Significant Differences Test with a confidence level of 95% (P <.05). Second- and third-order polynomial best-fit curves were also created for each group to further evaluate the mechanical behavior. Results: For symphysis loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and both of the plating techniques for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. For body loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and the inferior border plating group for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. Conclusion: During this bench top investigation, there were no significant differences noted in mechanical behavior between the 2 specific experimental groups for any of the conditions measured. When placed in the context of functional parameters, both of the plating techniques met or exceeded the requirements for loading.
pA  
A01 01  1    @0 0278-2391
A02 01      @0 JOMSDA
A03   1    @0 J. oral maxillofac. surg.
A05       @2 64
A06       @2 3
A08 01  1  ENG  @1 A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures
A11 01  1    @1 MADSEN (Matthew J.)
A11 02  1    @1 HAUG (Richard H.)
A14 01      @1 College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky @2 Lexington, KY @3 USA @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut.
A20       @1 457-465
A21       @1 2006
A23 01      @0 ENG
A43 01      @1 INIST @2 3005 @5 354000115197670160
A44       @0 0000 @1 © 2006 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.
A45       @0 37 ref.
A47 01  1    @0 06-0170065
A60       @1 P
A61       @0 A
A64 01  1    @0 Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery
A66 01      @0 USA
C01 01    ENG  @0 Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical behavior of 2 techniques for the reconstruction of atrophic edentulous mandible fractures. Materials and Methods: Thirty polyurethane atrophic edentulous mandible replicas (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA) were used in this investigation (10 controls, 10 replicas of 2 different fixation techniques). The first reconstruction technique was a traditional titanium locking reconstruction plate affixed to the lateral border (buccal surface) of the mandible. The second reconstruction technique used the same type of plate, but placed it on the inferior border of the mandible. Both constructs were subjected to vertical loading at the symphysis and torsional loading at the body regions of the mandible replicas by an Instron 1331 (Instron, Canton, MA) servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. Mechanical deformation data within a 0 -900 N range were recorded. Maximum load, displacement at maximum load, and stiffness were determined. Means and standard deviations were derived and compared for statistical significance using a Fisher's Protected Least Significant Differences Test with a confidence level of 95% (P <.05). Second- and third-order polynomial best-fit curves were also created for each group to further evaluate the mechanical behavior. Results: For symphysis loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and both of the plating techniques for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. For body loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and the inferior border plating group for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. Conclusion: During this bench top investigation, there were no significant differences noted in mechanical behavior between the 2 specific experimental groups for any of the conditions measured. When placed in the context of functional parameters, both of the plating techniques met or exceeded the requirements for loading.
C02 01  X    @0 002B10C02
C02 02  X    @0 002A08D
C02 03  X    @0 002B16H
C03 01  X  FRE  @0 Atrophie @5 01
C03 01  X  ENG  @0 Atrophy @5 01
C03 01  X  SPA  @0 Atrofia @5 01
C03 02  X  FRE  @0 Edentation @5 02
C03 02  X  ENG  @0 Edentulousness @5 02
C03 02  X  SPA  @0 Edentación @5 02
C03 03  X  FRE  @0 Fracture @5 03
C03 03  X  ENG  @0 Fracture @5 03
C03 03  X  SPA  @0 Fractura @5 03
C03 04  X  FRE  @0 Chirurgie @5 04
C03 04  X  ENG  @0 Surgery @5 04
C03 04  X  SPA  @0 Cirugía @5 04
C03 05  X  FRE  @0 Uréthane @2 FR @5 05
C03 05  X  ENG  @0 Urethane @2 FR @5 05
C03 05  X  SPA  @0 Uretano @2 FR @5 05
C03 06  X  FRE  @0 Biomécanique @5 07
C03 06  X  ENG  @0 Biomechanics @5 07
C03 06  X  SPA  @0 Biomecánica @5 07
C03 07  X  FRE  @0 Etude comparative @5 08
C03 07  X  ENG  @0 Comparative study @5 08
C03 07  X  SPA  @0 Estudio comparativo @5 08
C03 08  X  FRE  @0 Technique @5 09
C03 08  X  ENG  @0 Technique @5 09
C03 08  X  SPA  @0 Técnica @5 09
C03 09  X  FRE  @0 Modèle @5 10
C03 09  X  ENG  @0 Models @5 10
C03 09  X  SPA  @0 Modelo @5 10
C03 10  X  FRE  @0 Homme @5 11
C03 10  X  ENG  @0 Human @5 11
C03 10  X  SPA  @0 Hombre @5 11
C03 11  X  FRE  @0 Mandibule @5 13
C03 11  X  ENG  @0 Mandible @5 13
C03 11  X  SPA  @0 Mandíbula @5 13
C03 12  X  FRE  @0 Stomatologie @5 14
C03 12  X  ENG  @0 Stomatology @5 14
C03 12  X  SPA  @0 Estomatología @5 14
C03 13  X  FRE  @0 Traitement @5 30
C03 13  X  ENG  @0 Treatment @5 30
C03 13  X  SPA  @0 Tratamiento @5 30
C07 01  X  FRE  @0 Dent pathologie @5 37
C07 01  X  ENG  @0 Dental disease @5 37
C07 01  X  SPA  @0 Diente patología @5 37
C07 02  X  FRE  @0 Système ostéoarticulaire pathologie @5 38
C07 02  X  ENG  @0 Diseases of the osteoarticular system @5 38
C07 02  X  SPA  @0 Sistema osteoarticular patología @5 38
C07 03  X  FRE  @0 Traumatisme @5 39
C07 03  X  ENG  @0 Trauma @5 39
C07 03  X  SPA  @0 Traumatismo @5 39
N21       @1 100

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)


Links to Exploration step

Pascal:06-0170065

Le document en format XML

<record>
<TEI>
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title xml:lang="en" level="a">A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Madsen, Matthew J" sort="Madsen, Matthew J" uniqKey="Madsen M" first="Matthew J." last="Madsen">Matthew J. Madsen</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<inist:fA14 i1="01">
<s1>College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky</s1>
<s2>Lexington, KY</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>États-Unis</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Haug, Richard H" sort="Haug, Richard H" uniqKey="Haug R" first="Richard H." last="Haug">Richard H. Haug</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<inist:fA14 i1="01">
<s1>College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky</s1>
<s2>Lexington, KY</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>États-Unis</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">06-0170065</idno>
<date when="2006">2006</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 06-0170065 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:06-0170065</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000479</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Curation">000224</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<title xml:lang="en" level="a">A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Madsen, Matthew J" sort="Madsen, Matthew J" uniqKey="Madsen M" first="Matthew J." last="Madsen">Matthew J. Madsen</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<inist:fA14 i1="01">
<s1>College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky</s1>
<s2>Lexington, KY</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>États-Unis</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Haug, Richard H" sort="Haug, Richard H" uniqKey="Haug R" first="Richard H." last="Haug">Richard H. Haug</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1">
<inist:fA14 i1="01">
<s1>College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky</s1>
<s2>Lexington, KY</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>États-Unis</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series>
<title level="j" type="main">Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. oral maxillofac. surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0278-2391</idno>
<imprint>
<date when="2006">2006</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt>
<title level="j" type="main">Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. oral maxillofac. surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0278-2391</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<textClass>
<keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en">
<term>Atrophy</term>
<term>Biomechanics</term>
<term>Comparative study</term>
<term>Edentulousness</term>
<term>Fracture</term>
<term>Human</term>
<term>Mandible</term>
<term>Models</term>
<term>Stomatology</term>
<term>Surgery</term>
<term>Technique</term>
<term>Treatment</term>
<term>Urethane</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Atrophie</term>
<term>Edentation</term>
<term>Fracture</term>
<term>Chirurgie</term>
<term>Uréthane</term>
<term>Biomécanique</term>
<term>Etude comparative</term>
<term>Technique</term>
<term>Modèle</term>
<term>Homme</term>
<term>Mandibule</term>
<term>Stomatologie</term>
<term>Traitement</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr">
<term>Chirurgie</term>
<term>Homme</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front>
<div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical behavior of 2 techniques for the reconstruction of atrophic edentulous mandible fractures. Materials and Methods: Thirty polyurethane atrophic edentulous mandible replicas (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA) were used in this investigation (10 controls, 10 replicas of 2 different fixation techniques). The first reconstruction technique was a traditional titanium locking reconstruction plate affixed to the lateral border (buccal surface) of the mandible. The second reconstruction technique used the same type of plate, but placed it on the inferior border of the mandible. Both constructs were subjected to vertical loading at the symphysis and torsional loading at the body regions of the mandible replicas by an Instron 1331 (Instron, Canton, MA) servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. Mechanical deformation data within a 0 -900 N range were recorded. Maximum load, displacement at maximum load, and stiffness were determined. Means and standard deviations were derived and compared for statistical significance using a Fisher's Protected Least Significant Differences Test with a confidence level of 95% (P <.05). Second- and third-order polynomial best-fit curves were also created for each group to further evaluate the mechanical behavior. Results: For symphysis loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and both of the plating techniques for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. For body loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and the inferior border plating group for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. Conclusion: During this bench top investigation, there were no significant differences noted in mechanical behavior between the 2 specific experimental groups for any of the conditions measured. When placed in the context of functional parameters, both of the plating techniques met or exceeded the requirements for loading.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist>
<standard h6="B">
<pA>
<fA01 i1="01" i2="1">
<s0>0278-2391</s0>
</fA01>
<fA02 i1="01">
<s0>JOMSDA</s0>
</fA02>
<fA03 i2="1">
<s0>J. oral maxillofac. surg.</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05>
<s2>64</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06>
<s2>3</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG">
<s1>A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1">
<s1>MADSEN (Matthew J.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1">
<s1>HAUG (Richard H.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01">
<s1>College of Dentistry, University of Kentucky</s1>
<s2>Lexington, KY</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20>
<s1>457-465</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21>
<s1>2006</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01">
<s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01">
<s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>3005</s2>
<s5>354000115197670160</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44>
<s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2006 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45>
<s0>37 ref.</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1">
<s0>06-0170065</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60>
<s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61>
<s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1">
<s0>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01">
<s0>USA</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG">
<s0>Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical behavior of 2 techniques for the reconstruction of atrophic edentulous mandible fractures. Materials and Methods: Thirty polyurethane atrophic edentulous mandible replicas (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA) were used in this investigation (10 controls, 10 replicas of 2 different fixation techniques). The first reconstruction technique was a traditional titanium locking reconstruction plate affixed to the lateral border (buccal surface) of the mandible. The second reconstruction technique used the same type of plate, but placed it on the inferior border of the mandible. Both constructs were subjected to vertical loading at the symphysis and torsional loading at the body regions of the mandible replicas by an Instron 1331 (Instron, Canton, MA) servohydraulic mechanical testing unit. Mechanical deformation data within a 0 -900 N range were recorded. Maximum load, displacement at maximum load, and stiffness were determined. Means and standard deviations were derived and compared for statistical significance using a Fisher's Protected Least Significant Differences Test with a confidence level of 95% (P <.05). Second- and third-order polynomial best-fit curves were also created for each group to further evaluate the mechanical behavior. Results: For symphysis loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and both of the plating techniques for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. For body loading, statistically significant differences were noted between the control group and the inferior border plating group for displacement at maximum load. However, no differences were noted between the experimental groups for displacement at maximum load, stiffness, or maximum load. Conclusion: During this bench top investigation, there were no significant differences noted in mechanical behavior between the 2 specific experimental groups for any of the conditions measured. When placed in the context of functional parameters, both of the plating techniques met or exceeded the requirements for loading.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X">
<s0>002B10C02</s0>
</fC02>
<fC02 i1="02" i2="X">
<s0>002A08D</s0>
</fC02>
<fC02 i1="03" i2="X">
<s0>002B16H</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Atrophie</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Atrophy</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Atrofia</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Edentation</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Edentulousness</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Edentación</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Fracture</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Fracture</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Fractura</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Chirurgie</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Surgery</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Cirugía</s0>
<s5>04</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Uréthane</s0>
<s2>FR</s2>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Urethane</s0>
<s2>FR</s2>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Uretano</s0>
<s2>FR</s2>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Biomécanique</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Biomechanics</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Biomecánica</s0>
<s5>07</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Etude comparative</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Comparative study</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Estudio comparativo</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Technique</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Technique</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Técnica</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Modèle</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Models</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Modelo</s0>
<s5>10</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Homme</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Human</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Hombre</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Mandibule</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Mandible</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Mandíbula</s0>
<s5>13</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Stomatologie</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Stomatology</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Estomatología</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Traitement</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Treatment</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="13" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Tratamiento</s0>
<s5>30</s5>
</fC03>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Dent pathologie</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Dental disease</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Diente patología</s0>
<s5>37</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Système ostéoarticulaire pathologie</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Sistema osteoarticular patología</s0>
<s5>38</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE">
<s0>Traumatisme</s0>
<s5>39</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG">
<s0>Trauma</s0>
<s5>39</s5>
</fC07>
<fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA">
<s0>Traumatismo</s0>
<s5>39</s5>
</fC07>
<fN21>
<s1>100</s1>
</fN21>
</pA>
</standard>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/PascalFrancis/Curation
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000224 | SxmlIndent | more

Ou

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 000224 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Santé
   |area=    EdenteV2
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Curation
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:06-0170065
   |texte=   A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures
}}

Wicri

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022