605 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18834006)
1. Treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion in adults: stepwise vs single-step advancement with the Herbst appliance.
Purkayastha SK; Rabie AB; Wong R
World J Orthod; 2008; 9(3):233-43. PubMed ID: 18834006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Comparison of soft-tissue profiles after treatment with headgear or Herbst appliance.
Sloss EA; Southard KA; Qian F; Stock SE; Mann KR; Meyer DL; Southard TE
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Apr; 133(4):509-14. PubMed ID: 18405814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Short-term skeletal and dental effects of the Xbow appliance as measured on lateral cephalograms.
Flores-Mir C; Barnett G; Higgins DW; Heo G; Major PW
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Dec; 136(6):822-32. PubMed ID: 19962605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Post-treatment occlusal changes in Class II division 2 subjects treated with the Herbst appliance.
Bock N; Ruf S
Eur J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 30(6):606-13. PubMed ID: 19054814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. The integrated Herbst appliance--treatment effects in a group of adolescent males with Class II malocclusions compared with growth changes in an untreated control group.
Hägglund P; Segerdal S; Forsberg CM
Eur J Orthod; 2008 Apr; 30(2):120-7. PubMed ID: 18216374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Occlusal stability of adult Class II Division 1 treatment with the Herbst appliance.
Bock NC; von Bremen J; Ruf S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Aug; 138(2):146-51. PubMed ID: 20691355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Condylar growth and mandibular positioning with stepwise vs maximum advancement.
Hägg U; Rabie AB; Bendeus M; Wong RW; Wey MC; Du X; Peng J
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Oct; 134(4):525-36. PubMed ID: 18929270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cephalometric study of Class II Division 1 patients treated with an extended-duration, reinforced, banded Herbst appliance followed by fixed appliances.
Tomblyn T; Rogers M; Andrews L; Martin C; Tremont T; Gunel E; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Nov; 150(5):818-830. PubMed ID: 27871709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The mechanism of Class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: a cephalometric roentgenographic study.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Angle Orthod; 1997; 67(4):271-6. PubMed ID: 9267575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 2. Soft tissue changes.
Sharma AA; Lee RT
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):473-82. PubMed ID: 15821692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effectiveness of incremental vs maximum bite advancement during Herbst appliance therapy in late adolescent and young adult patients.
Amuk NG; Baysal A; Coskun R; Kurt G
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2019 Jan; 155(1):48-56. PubMed ID: 30591165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation.
VanLaecken R; Martin CA; Dischinger T; Razmus T; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):582-93. PubMed ID: 17110255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Stepwise advancement Herbst appliance versus mandibular sagittal split osteotomy. Treatment effects and long-term stability of adult Class II patients.
Chaiyongsirisern A; Rabie AB; Wong RW
Angle Orthod; 2009 Nov; 79(6):1084-94. PubMed ID: 19852598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Effects of headgear Herbst and mandibular step-by-step advancement versus conventional Herbst appliance and maximal jumping of the mandible.
Du X; Hägg U; Rabie AB
Eur J Orthod; 2002 Apr; 24(2):167-74. PubMed ID: 12001553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Orthognathic surgery and dentofacial orthopedics in adult Class II Division 1 treatment: mandibular sagittal split osteotomy versus Herbst appliance.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Aug; 126(2):140-52; quiz 254-5. PubMed ID: 15316468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
