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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15315104)

  • 1. [Class II malocclusion. Time and cost of a combined orthodontic and surgical treatment].
    Breuning KH; van Strijen PJ
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2004 Jul; 111(7):261-5. PubMed ID: 15315104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Outcome of treatment of Class II malocclusion by intraoral mandibular distraction.
    Breuning KH; van Strijen PJ; Prahl-Andersen B; Tuinzing DB
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2004 Dec; 42(6):520-5. PubMed ID: 15544881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Duration of orthodontic treatment and mandibular lengthening by means of distraction or bilateral sagittal split osteotomy in patients with Angle Class II malocclusions.
    Breuning KH; van Strijen PJ; Prahl-Andersen B; Tuinzing DB
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Jan; 127(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 15643411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The overbite and intraoral mandibular distraction osteogenesis.
    Breuning KH; van Strijen PJ; Prahl-Andersen B; Tuinzing DB
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2004 Apr; 32(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 14980594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Mandibular distraction during orthodontic treatment].
    Breuning KH; van Strijen PJ
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2003 Jan; 110(1):50-4. PubMed ID: 15004991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Long-term comparison of treatment outcome and stability of Class II patients treated with functional appliances versus bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy.
    Berger JL; Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; George C; Kaczynski R
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):451-64; quiz 516-7. PubMed ID: 15821690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cervical headgear vs pendulum appliance for the treatment of moderate skeletal Class II malocclusion.
    Mossaz CF; Byloff FK; Kiliaridis S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Nov; 132(5):616-23. PubMed ID: 18005835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cephalometric evaluation of Class II malocclusion treatment with cervical headgear and mandibular fixed appliances.
    Freitas MR; Lima DV; Freitas KM; Janson G; Henriques JF
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Oct; 30(5):477-82. PubMed ID: 18725383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment.
    Dolce C; McGorray SP; Brazeau L; King GJ; Wheeler TT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):481-9. PubMed ID: 17920501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Functional appliance treatment outcome and need for additional orthodontic treatment with fixed appliance.
    Rizell S; Svensson B; Tengström C; Kjellberg H
    Swed Dent J; 2006; 30(2):61-8. PubMed ID: 16878681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and cervical headgear appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment.
    de Oliveira JN; Rodrigues de Almeida R; Rodrigues de Almeida M; de Oliveira JN
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jul; 132(1):54-62. PubMed ID: 17628251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mandibular widening by intraoral distraction osteogenesis for severe telescopic bite correction: a report of 2 cases.
    Azumi Y; Sugawara J; Nagasaka H; Kawamura H
    World J Orthod; 2007; 8(3):221-31. PubMed ID: 17902327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Treating Class II patients with removable plates and functional orthopedic appliances-the importance of anterior tooth inclination and direction of growth on treatment outcome.
    Hönn M; Schneider C; Dietz K; Godt A; Göz G
    J Orofac Orthop; 2006 Jul; 67(4):272-88. PubMed ID: 16838095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Treatment of condylar hypoplasia with distraction osteogenesis: a case report.
    Arun T; Kayhan F; Kiziltan M
    Angle Orthod; 2002 Aug; 72(4):371-6. PubMed ID: 12169038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion: a comparison of surgical and non-surgical class II treatment.
    Shell TL; Woods MG
    Aust Orthod J; 2004 Nov; 20(2):51-63. PubMed ID: 16429875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Orthodontics in general practice 3. Angle Class II/1 malocclusion: one-phase treatment treatment preferred to two-phase treatment].
    Kuijpers MA; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2008 Jan; 115(1):22-8. PubMed ID: 18265733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of posttreatment changes in Class II Division 1 patients after nonextraction orthodontic treatment: cephalometric and model analysis.
    Ciger S; Aksu M; Germeç D
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Feb; 127(2):219-23. PubMed ID: 15750542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Orthodontists' views on indications for and timing of orthodontic treatment in Finnish public oral health care.
    Pietilä I; Pietilä T; Pirttiniemi P; Varrela J; Alanen P
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Feb; 30(1):46-51. PubMed ID: 17962314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Long-term changes in pharyngeal airway dimensions following activator-headgear and fixed appliance treatment.
    Hänggi MP; Teuscher UM; Roos M; Peltomäki TA
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 30(6):598-605. PubMed ID: 18974068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of arch dimension changes in 1-phase vs 2-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion.
    Wortham JR; Dolce C; McGorray SP; Le H; King GJ; Wheeler TT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 19577150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.