These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14994882)

  • 1. The effect of a modified reverse headgear force applied with a facebow on the dentofacial structures.
    Göyenç Y; Ersoy S
    Eur J Orthod; 2004 Feb; 26(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 14994882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effects of a modified protraction headgear on maxilla.
    Alcan T; Keles A; Erverdi N
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Jan; 117(1):27-38. PubMed ID: 10629517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effects of maxillary protraction and its long-term stability--a clinical trial in Chinese adolescents.
    Chen L; Chen R; Yang Y; Ji G; Shen G
    Eur J Orthod; 2012 Feb; 34(1):88-95. PubMed ID: 21325335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of double-plate appliance and facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.
    Ucem TT; Ucuncü N; Yüksel S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Dec; 126(6):672-9. PubMed ID: 15592214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Treatment and posttreatment effects of a facial mask combined with a bite-block appliance in Class III malocclusion.
    Cozza P; Baccetti T; Mucedero M; Pavoni C; Franchi L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Sep; 138(3):300-10. PubMed ID: 20816299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Changes in dentofacial morphology in skeletal Class III children treated by a modified maxillary protraction headgear and a chin cup: a longitudinal cephalometric appraisal.
    Takada K; Petdachai S; Sakuda M
    Eur J Orthod; 1993 Jun; 15(3):211-21. PubMed ID: 8339762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A novel approach in treatment of maxillary deficiency by reverse chin cup.
    Showkatbakhsh R; Jamilian A
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2010; 21(2):27-31. PubMed ID: 20687313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Craniofacial adaptations induced by chincup therapy in Class III patients.
    Deguchi T; McNamara JA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Feb; 115(2):175-82. PubMed ID: 9971929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of face mask and tongue plate on maxillary deficiency in growing patients: a randomized clinical trial.
    Showkatbakhsh R; Toumarian L; Jamilian A; Sheibaninia A; Mirkarimi M; Taban T
    J Orthod; 2013 Jun; 40(2):130-6. PubMed ID: 23794693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Skeletal and dental components of Class II correction with the bionator and removable headgear splint appliances.
    Martins RP; da Rosa Martins JC; Martins LP; Buschang PH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Dec; 134(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 19061799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dental and skeletal components of Class II open bite treatment with a modified Thurow appliance.
    Jacob HB; dos Santos-Pinto A; Buschang PH
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 24713556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage.
    Sar C; Arman-Özçırpıcı A; Uçkan S; Yazıcı AC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 May; 139(5):636-49. PubMed ID: 21536207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Molar distalization with a pendulum appliance K-loop combination.
    Acar AG; Gürsoy S; Dinçer M
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Aug; 32(4):459-65. PubMed ID: 20231213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of two maxillary protraction protocols: tooth-borne versus bone-anchored protraction facemask treatment.
    Ngan P; Wilmes B; Drescher D; Martin C; Weaver B; Gunel E
    Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():26. PubMed ID: 26303311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is bodily advancement of the lower incisors possible?
    Strahm C; De Sousa AP; Grobéty D; Mavropoulos A; Kiliaridis S
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):425-31. PubMed ID: 19395370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Treatment effects of simple fixed appliance and reverse headgear in correction of anterior crossbites.
    Gu Y; Rabie AB; Hägg U
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Jun; 117(6):691-9. PubMed ID: 10842112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Skeletal and dental effects of a mini maxillary protraction appliance.
    Altug Z; Arslan AD
    Angle Orthod; 2006 May; 76(3):360-8. PubMed ID: 16637712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dentofacial effects of skeletal anchored treatment modalities for the correction of maxillary retrognathia.
    Sar C; Sahinoğlu Z; Özçirpici AA; Uçkan S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jan; 145(1):41-54. PubMed ID: 24373654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Treatment response to maxillary expansion and protraction.
    Ngan P; Hägg U; Yiu C; Merwin D; Wei SH
    Eur J Orthod; 1996 Apr; 18(2):151-68. PubMed ID: 8670927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Modified tandem traction bow appliance compared with facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.
    Tortop T; Kaygisiz E; Gencer D; Yuksel S; Atalay Z
    Angle Orthod; 2014 Jul; 84(4):642-8. PubMed ID: 24274958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.