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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16955161)

  • 1. [A study of highpull extraoral traction on the treatment of growing patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion].
    You QL; Cai Z
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2006 Aug; 15(4):375-7. PubMed ID: 16955161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of activator and high-pull headgear combination therapy: skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue profile changes.
    Marşan G
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Apr; 29(2):140-8. PubMed ID: 17488997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty.
    Baccetti T; Franchi L; Stahl F
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jun; 135(6):698.e1-10; discussion 698-9. PubMed ID: 19524823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Class II correction in Herbst and Bass therapy.
    Pancherz H; Malmgren O; Hägg U; Omblus J; Hansen K
    Eur J Orthod; 1989 Feb; 11(1):17-30. PubMed ID: 2714389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Control of the vertical dimension in Class II correction using a cervical headgear and lower utility arch in growing patients. Part I.
    Cook AH; Sellke TA; BeGole EA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Oct; 106(4):376-88. PubMed ID: 7942653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Growth and treatment changes in patients treated with a headgear-activator appliance.
    Bendeus M; Hägg U; Rabie B
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Apr; 121(4):376-84. PubMed ID: 11997762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A cephalometric study to compare the effects of cervical traction and Andresen therapy in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion. Part 1--Skeletal changes.
    Derringer K
    Br J Orthod; 1990 Feb; 17(1):33-46. PubMed ID: 2310738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Treating Class II malocclusion in children. Vertical skeletal effects of high-pull or low-pull headgear during comprehensive orthodontic treatment and retention.
    Antonarakis GS; Kiliaridis S
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2015 May; 18(2):86-95. PubMed ID: 25545335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [A study on the extraoral cervical traction in the treatment of skeletal Class II division 1 malocclusion in mixed dentition].
    Sun Y; Liu HH; Cao HJ
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2005 Jun; 14(3):243-6. PubMed ID: 15995768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Treatment of a complex malocclusion in a growing skeletal Class II patient.
    El Refaei AK; Fayed MM; Heider AM; Mostafa YA
    J Clin Orthod; 2014 Mar; 48(3):181-9. PubMed ID: 24762377
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Treated with a Cervical-Pull Headgear: A Case Report.
    Shah AH
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2016; 27(1):25-8. PubMed ID: 27319037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Maxillary "en masse" high-pull traction in Class II division 1 subjects: Which kind of skeletal outcomes does it produce?
    Silvestrini-Biavati F; Lazzarotti L; Bini S; Migliorati M; Ugolini A
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2020 Dec; 21(4):271-276. PubMed ID: 33337901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
    Yao CC; Lai EH; Chang JZ; Chen I; Chen YJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):615-24. PubMed ID: 18984393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of the reciprocal mini-chin cup appliance.
    Aslan BI; Dinçer M
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Feb; 30(1):80-8. PubMed ID: 18276929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Study of the structural compensation of the mandible during treatment with cervical headgear].
    Işcan HN; Dinçer M; Gültan AS
    Turk Ortodonti Derg; 1989 Nov; 2(2):287-98. PubMed ID: 2489161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Short-term anteroposterior treatment effects of functional appliances and extraoral traction on class II malocclusion. A meta-analysis.
    Antonarakis GS; Kiliaridis S
    Angle Orthod; 2007 Sep; 77(5):907-14. PubMed ID: 17902235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Uprighting the mandibular molars stimulates mandibular growth during treatment of class II malocclusion.
    Miyajima K; Yoshimoto J; Murata S; Kanomi R
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1997; 64(5):340-3. PubMed ID: 9391711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion.
    Spalj S; Mroz Tranesen K; Birkeland K; Katic V; Pavlic A; Vandevska-Radunovic V
    Biomed Res Int; 2017; 2017():4861924. PubMed ID: 28203569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Maxillary expansion in Class II correction with orthopedic cervical headgear. A posteroanterior cephalometric study.
    Kirjavainen M; Kirjavainen T
    Angle Orthod; 2003 Jun; 73(3):281-5. PubMed ID: 12828436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Orthopedic cervical headgear in class II treatment: case report.
    Enoki C; Matsumoto MA; Ferreira JT
    Braz Dent J; 2003; 14(1):63-6. PubMed ID: 12656468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.