91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15883933)
1. Prediction accuracy of computer-assisted surgical visual treatment objectives as compared with conventional visual treatment objectives.
Gossett CB; Preston CB; Dunford R; Lampasso J
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2005 May; 63(5):609-17. PubMed ID: 15883933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computer prediction of hard tissue profiles in orthognathic surgery.
Loh S; Yow M
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 2002; 17(4):342-7. PubMed ID: 12593006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Achieving the prediction results by visualized treatment objective following anterior maxillary segmental osteotomy. A retrospective study.
Venkatesh V; Kumar KA; Mohan AP; Kumar BP; Kunusoth R; Kumar MP
J Maxillofac Oral Surg; 2013 Jun; 12(2):188-96. PubMed ID: 24431838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The accuracy of two-dimensional planning for routine orthognathic surgery.
Rustemeyer J; Groddeck A; Zwerger S; Bremerich A
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2010 Jun; 48(4):271-5. PubMed ID: 19632014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A radiographic analysis of computer prediction in conjunction with orthognathic surgery.
Loh S; Heng JK; Ward-Booth P; Winchester L; McDonald F
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2001 Aug; 30(4):259-63. PubMed ID: 11518345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses.
Uysal T; Baysal A; Yagci A
Eur J Orthod; 2009 Oct; 31(5):523-8. PubMed ID: 19443692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prediction accuracy of soft tissue profile in orthognathic surgery.
Mankad B; Cisneros GJ; Freeman K; Eisig SB
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1999; 14(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 10337247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of minimal versus conventional presurgical orthodontics in skeletal class III patients treated with two-jaw surgery.
Joh B; Bayome M; Park JH; Park JU; Kim Y; Kook YA
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Oct; 71(10):1733-41. PubMed ID: 23932114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of a LeFort I maxillary osteotomy.
Semaan S; Goonewardene MS
Angle Orthod; 2005 Nov; 75(6):964-73. PubMed ID: 16448239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surgical prediction of skeletal and soft tissue changes in Class III treatment.
de Lira Ade L; de Moura WL; de Barros Vieira JM; Nojima MG; Nojima LI
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Apr; 70(4):e290-7. PubMed ID: 22449434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Establishing cephalometric landmarks for the translational study of Le Fort-based facial transplantation in Swine: enhanced applications using computer-assisted surgery and custom cutting guides.
Santiago GF; Susarla SM; Al Rakan M; Coon D; Rada EM; Sarhane KA; Shores JT; Bonawitz SC; Cooney D; Sacks J; Murphy RJ; Fishman EK; Brandacher G; Lee WPA; Liacouras P; Grant G; Armand M; Gordon CR
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2014 May; 133(5):1138-1151. PubMed ID: 24445879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Soft and hard tissue changes after bimaxillary surgery in Turkish female Class III patients.
Marşan G; Cura N; Emekli U
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2009 Jan; 37(1):8-17. PubMed ID: 18786833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Picture archiving and communications systems: a study of reliability of orthodontic cephalometric analysis.
Tan SS; Ahmad S; Moles DR; Cunningham SJ
Eur J Orthod; 2011 Oct; 33(5):537-43. PubMed ID: 21106665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An evaluation of two VTO methods.
Sample LB; Sadowsky PL; Bradley E
Angle Orthod; 1998 Oct; 68(5):401-8. PubMed ID: 9770097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy of combined maxillary and mandibular repositioning and of soft tissue prediction in relation to maxillary antero-superior repositioning combined with mandibular set back A computerized cephalometric evaluation of the immediate postsurgical outcome using the TIOPS planning system.
Donatsky O; Bjørn-Jørgensen J; Hermund NU; Nielsen H; Holmqvist-Larsen M; Nerder PH
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2009 Jul; 37(5):279-84. PubMed ID: 19188076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Manual tracing versus smartphone application (app) tracing: a comparative study.
Sayar G; Kilinc DD
Acta Odontol Scand; 2017 Nov; 75(8):588-594. PubMed ID: 28793813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program.
Periago DR; Scarfe WC; Moshiri M; Scheetz JP; Silveira AM; Farman AG
Angle Orthod; 2008 May; 78(3):387-95. PubMed ID: 18416632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Method to verify the accuracy of model surgery and prediction tracing.
Omura T; Glickman RS; Super S
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1996; 11(3):265-70. PubMed ID: 9456630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Surgical prediction of skeletal and soft tissue changes in treatment of Class II.
de Lira Ade L; de Moura WL; Artese F; Bittencourt MA; Nojima LI
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2013 Apr; 41(3):198-203. PubMed ID: 23201327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Surgery-first approach in skeletal class III malocclusion treated with 2-jaw surgery: evaluation of surgical movement and postoperative orthodontic treatment.
Baek SH; Ahn HW; Kwon YH; Choi JY
J Craniofac Surg; 2010 Mar; 21(2):332-8. PubMed ID: 20186090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
