Browsing by Author "Neff, Andreas"
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settingsMoving the mandible in orthognathic surgery - A multicenter analysis(Churchill Livingstone, 2016)
;Thiele, Oliver C. ;Kreppel, Matthias ;Bittermann, Gido ;Bonitz, Lars ;Desmedt, Maria ;Dittes, Carsten ;Doerre, Annegret ;Dunsche, Anton ;Eckert, Alexander W. ;Ehrenfeld, Michael ;Fleiner, Bernd ;Frerich, Bernhard ;Gaggl, Alexander ;Gerressen, Marcus ;Gmeli, Leonore ;Hammacher, Andreas ;Hassfeld, Stefan ;Heiland, Max ;Hemprich, Alexander ;Hidding, Johannes ;Hoelzle, Frank ;Howaldt, Hans-Peter ;Iizuka, Tateyuki ;Kater, Wolfgang ;Klein, Cornelius ;Klein, Martin ;Koehnke, Robert H. ;Kolk, Andreas ;Kuebler, Alexander C. ;Kuebler, Norbert R. ;Kunkel, Martin ;Kuttenberger, Johannes J. ;Kreusch, Thomas ;Landes, Constantin ;Lehner, Bernhard ;Mischkowski, Robert A. ;Mokros, Steffen ;Neff, Andreas ;Nkenke, Emeka ;Palm, Frank ;Paulus, Gerhard W. ;Piesold, Joern U. ;Rasse, Michael ;Rodemer, Herbert ;Rothamel, Daniel ;Rustemeyer, Jan ;Sader, Robert ;Scheer, Martin ;Scheffier, Birgit ;Schippers, Christian; ;Schmelzeisen, Rainer ;Schramm, Alexander ;Spitzer, Wolfgang J. ;Stoll, Christian ;Terheyden, Hendrik ;Weingart, Dieter ;Wiltfang, Joerg ;Wolff, Klaus D. ;Ziegler, Christoph M.Zoeller, Joachim E.Orthognathic surgery has always been a classical focus of maxillofacial surgery. Since more than 100 years, various surgical techniques for mandibular repositioning have been developed and clinically tested. Since the establishment of plate and screw osteosynthesis, orthognathic surgery became more stable and safe. Nowadays, different surgical methods for mobilising the mandible are existing. This international multicenter analysis (n = 51 hospitals) is providing first evidence based data for the current use of different surgical methods. The dominating techniques were Obwegeser/dal Pont (61%) followed by Hunsuck/Epker (37%) and Perthes/Schlossmann (29%). The main osteosynthesis materials were plates (82%), bicortical screws (23.5%), or a combination of both (5.9%). 47% of all centers reported to use several surgical methods at the same time, depending on the anatomical problem and the surgeon's preference. This shows that different surgical methods seem to work as comparable, safe, and reliable procedures in everydays clinical practise. On this basis, further prospective studies could evaluate possible advantages for our patients. (C) 2016 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settingsPolarized photoluminescence clocks ultrafast pseudospin relaxation in graphene(2017)
;Danz, Thomas ;Neff, Andreas ;Gaida, John ;Bormann, Reiner; Schäfer, Sascha - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settingsThe current state of facial prosthetics - A multicenter analysis(Churchill Livingstone, 2015)
;Thiele, Oliver C. ;Brom, Joern ;Dunsche, Anton ;Ehrenfeld, Michael ;Federspil, Philippe ;French, Bernhard ;Hoelzle, Frank ;Klein, Martin ;Kreppel, Matthias ;Kuebler, Alexander C. ;Kuebler, Norbert R. ;Kunkel, Martin ;Kuttenberger, Johannes J. ;Lauer, Gunter ;Mayer, Boris ;Mohr, Christopher ;Neff, Andreas ;Rasse, Michael ;Reich, Rudolf H. ;Reinert, Siegmar ;Rothamel, Daniel ;Sader, Robert; ;Schmelzeisen, Rainer ;Schramm, Alexander ;Sieg, Peter ;Terheyden, Hendrik ;Wiltfang, Joerg ;Ziegler, Christoph M. ;Mischkowski, Robert A.Zoeller, Joachim E.Even though modern surgical techniques are dominating reconstructive facial procedures, the capability to use facial epitheses for reconstruction is still an important skill for the maxillofacial surgeon. We present an international multicenter analysis to clarify which techniques are used to fixate facial prostheses. We contacted all maxillofacial departments in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and Norway which were registered with the German society for oral and maxillofacial surgery (DGMKG). These centers were asked via electronical mail to provide information on the type of epithesis fixation systems currently in use. The return rate from 58 departments was 43.1% (n = 25). Overall, implant fixation was the preferred fixation system (92%). Plates were the second most common fixation technique (32%). No centers reported the standard use of non-invasive fixation techniques for permanent epithesis fixation. The main retention systems in use were magnets (24/25), other retention systems are used much less often. The current preferred fixation technique for facial epitheses consists of implant-based, magnet-fixated epitheses. For nasal prostheses, a plate-based, magnet-fixated system is often used. (C) 2015 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settingsUltrafast sublattice pseudospin relaxation in graphene probed by polarization-resolved photoluminescence(Amer Physical Soc, 2017)
; ;Neff, Andreas ;Gaida, John H.; ; Electronic pseudospin degrees of freedom in two-dimensional materials exhibit unique carrier-field interactions which allow for advanced control strategies. Here, we investigate ultrafast sublattice pseudospin relaxation in graphene by means of polarization-resolved photoluminescence spectroscopy. A comparison with microscopic Boltzmann simulations allows us to determine a lifetime of the optically aligned pseudospin distribution of 12 +/- 2 fs. This experimental approach extends the toolbox of graphene pseudospintronics, providing additional means to investigate pseudospin dynamics in active devices or under external fields.