790 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17110256)
1. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Twin-block and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: a comparative study.
Jena AK; Duggal R; Parkash H
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):594-602. PubMed ID: 17110256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Treatment timing for Twin-block therapy.
Baccetti T; Franchi L; Toth LR; McNamara JA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Aug; 118(2):159-70. PubMed ID: 10935956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Comparison of Twin-block and Dynamax appliances for the treatment of Class II malocclusion in adolescents: a randomized controlled trial.
Thiruvenkatachari B; Sandler J; Murray A; Walsh T; O'Brien K
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Aug; 138(2):144.e1-9; discussion 144-5. PubMed ID: 20691354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Stability of Class II treatment with an edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition: Skeletal and dental changes.
Wigal TG; Dischinger T; Martin C; Razmus T; Gunel E; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Aug; 140(2):210-23. PubMed ID: 21803259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparision of Twin-block and Forsus (FRD) functional appliance--a cephalometric study.
Mahamad IK; Neela PK; Mascarenhas R; Husain A
Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012; 23(3):49-58. PubMed ID: 23094559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Cephalometric markers to consider in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with the bionator.
Ahn SJ; Kim JT; Nahm DS
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 Jun; 119(6):578-86. PubMed ID: 11395700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the twin block appliance.
Mills CM; McCulloch KJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Jul; 118(1):24-33. PubMed ID: 10893470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An evaluation of maxillary and mandibular rotational responses with the Clark twin block appliance.
Lau EY; Sampson WJ; Townsend GC; Hughes T
Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 19634464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Effect of Twin-block appliance in the treatment of Class II and division I malocclusion: a cephalometric study in 12 patients].
Luo Y; Fang G
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2005 Feb; 14(1):90-3. PubMed ID: 15747025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Orthodontic treatment changes of chin position in Class II Division 1 patients.
LaHaye MB; Buschang PH; Alexander RG; Boley JC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Dec; 130(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 17169735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Long-term effectiveness and treatment timing for Bionator therapy.
Faltin KJ; Faltin RM; Baccetti T; Franchi L; Ghiozzi B; McNamara JA
Angle Orthod; 2003 Jun; 73(3):221-30. PubMed ID: 12828429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Class II correction in patients treated with class II elastics and with fixed functional appliances: a comparative study.
Nelson B; Hansen K; Hägg U
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Aug; 118(2):142-9. PubMed ID: 10935954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical effectiveness of the Twin block appliance in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
Sidlauskas A
Stomatologija; 2005; 7(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 16254470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Treatment of developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion with Jumper Twin Block.
Hammad SM; Bashir ES; El-Bialy AA
Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012; 23(2):51-6. PubMed ID: 22873025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 1. Hard tissue changes.
Gill DS; Lee RT
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):465-72; quiz 517. PubMed ID: 15821691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Treatment effects of twin-block and mandibular protraction appliance-IV in the correction of class II malocclusion.
Jena AK; Duggal R
Angle Orthod; 2010 May; 80(3):485-91. PubMed ID: 20050741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
