首页> 外文OA文献 >Response to the letter to the editor by Tsatsos et al. “To remove or not to remove (the AC-IOL)? This is the question. Letter regarding article Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens by Droutsas et al.”

【2h】

Response to the letter to the editor by Tsatsos et al. “To remove or not to remove (the AC-IOL)? This is the question. Letter regarding article Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens by Droutsas et al.”

机译：Tsatsos等人对编辑信的回应。 “要删除或不删除（AC-IOL）？这是问题。关于文章内皮角膜术的信用DROTSAS等人用保留的角度支撑的眼内晶状体。“

代理获取

本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

页面导航

著录项
引文网络
相似文献
相关主题

著录项

作者
Konstantinos Droutsas; Apostolos Lazaridis; George Kymionis; Klio Chatzistefanou; Dimitris Papaconstantinou; Walter Sekundo; Chryssanthi Koutsandrea;
展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
年度 2018
总页数
原文格式 PDF
正文语种
中图分类

相似文献

外文文献

1. Response to the letter to the editor by Tsatsos et al. ‘‘To remove or not to remove (the AC-IOL)? This is the question. Letter regarding article Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens by Droutsas et al.’’ [J] . Konstantinos Droutsas, Apostolos Lazaridis, George Kymionis, International ophthalmology . 2019,第9期

机译：Tsatsos等人对编辑信的回应。 ''删除或不删除（AC-IOL）？这是问题。关于文章内皮角膜术的信，用德拉斯等人使用保留的角度支撑的眼内晶状体。''
2. Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens [J] . Konstantinos Droutsas, Apostolos Lazaridis, George Kymionis, International ophthalmology . 2019,第5期

机译：内皮角膜术在眼中，带有保留的角度支撑的眼内透镜
3. Response to the Letter-to-the Editor by Cohen et al. concerning our eNeurologicalSci article, Melamed-Gal, et al. Physicochemical, biological, functional and toxicological characterization of the European follow-on glatiramer acetate product as compared with Copaxone. eNeurologicalSci 2018;12:19–30.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2018.05.006 [J] . Sigal Melamed-Gal, Pippa Loupe, Bracha Timan, eNeurologicalSci . 2018,第2期

机译：Cohen等人对写给编辑的信的回应。关于我们的eNeurologicSci文章，Melamed-Gal等。与Copaxone相比，欧洲后续醋酸格拉替雷产品的理化，生物学，功能和毒理学表征。 eNeurologicSci 2018; 12：19–30.https：//doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2018.05.006
4. Response to the Letter-to-the Editor by Cohen et al. concerning our eNeurologicalSci article Melamed-Gal et al. Physicochemical biological functional and toxicological characterization of the European follow-on glatiramer acetate product as compared with Copaxone. eNeurologicalSci 2018;12:19–30.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2018.05.006 [O] . Sigal Melamed-Gal, Pippa Loupe, Bracha Timan, 2018

机译：Cohen等人对写给编辑的信的回应。关于我们的eNeurologicSci文章Melamed-Gal等。与Copaxone相比欧洲后续醋酸格拉替雷产品的理化生物学功能和毒理学表征。 eNeurologicSci 2018; 12：19–30.https：//doi.org/10.1016/j.ensci.2018.05.006
5. Editorial Notice: Re: Letter to the Editor. Substandard Studies or Substandard ‘Standard-of-Care.’ Sato et al. J Bone Miner Res. 2006;21:492. Response to Letter From Caffrey et al. J Bone Miner Res. 2006;21:491 [O] . 2017

机译：编辑公告：RE：给编辑的信。不合标准的研究或不合标准的护理标准.'ATO等人。 J Bone Miner Res。 2006; 21：492。回应Caffrey等人的信。 J Bone Miner Res。 2006; 21：491

Response to the letter to the editor by Tsatsos et al. “To remove or not to remove (the AC-IOL)? This is the question. Letter regarding article Endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with a retained angle-supported intraocular lens by Droutsas et al.”

著录项

引文网络

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅