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 *

841 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19465738)

  • 1. Prevalence and type of pain during conventional and self-ligating orthodontic treatment.
    Tecco S; D'Attilio M; Tetè S; Festa F
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):380-4. PubMed ID: 19465738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An in vitro investigation of the influence of self-ligating brackets, low friction ligatures, and archwire on frictional resistance.
    Tecco S; Di Iorio D; Cordasco G; Verrocchi I; Festa F
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Aug; 29(4):390-7. PubMed ID: 17702800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Treatment efficiency of conventional vs self-ligating brackets: effects of archwire size and material.
    Turnbull NR; Birnie DJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Mar; 131(3):395-9. PubMed ID: 17346597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative evaluation of frictional forces in active and passive self-ligating brackets with various archwire alloys.
    Krishnan M; Kalathil S; Abraham KM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Nov; 136(5):675-82. PubMed ID: 19892284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mechanical properties of coated superelastic archwires in conventional and self-ligating orthodontic brackets.
    Elayyan F; Silikas N; Bearn D
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Feb; 137(2):213-7. PubMed ID: 20152677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro evaluation of the frictional forces between brackets and archwire with three passive self-ligating brackets.
    Cordasco G; Farronato G; Festa F; Nucera R; Parazzoli E; Grossi GB
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Dec; 31(6):643-6. PubMed ID: 19797412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mandibular dental arch changes associated with treatment of crowding using self-ligating and conventional brackets.
    Pandis N; Polychronopoulou A; Makou M; Eliades T
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):248-53. PubMed ID: 19959610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Friction of conventional and self-ligating brackets using a 10 bracket model.
    Tecco S; Festa F; Caputi S; Traini T; Di Iorio D; D'Attilio M
    Angle Orthod; 2005 Nov; 75(6):1041-5. PubMed ID: 16448253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of frictional forces during dental alignment: an experimental model with 3 nonleveled brackets.
    Matarese G; Nucera R; Militi A; Mazza M; Portelli M; Festa F; Cordasco G
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 May; 133(5):708-15. PubMed ID: 18456144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pain experience during initial alignment with a self-ligating and a conventional fixed orthodontic appliance system. A randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Fleming PS; Dibiase AT; Sarri G; Lee RT
    Angle Orthod; 2009 Jan; 79(1):46-50. PubMed ID: 19123718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Force loss in archwire-guided tooth movement of conventional and self-ligating brackets.
    Montasser MA; El-Bialy T; Keilig L; Reimann S; Jäger A; Bourauel C
    Eur J Orthod; 2014 Feb; 36(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 23382468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prospective randomized clinical trial to compare pain levels associated with 2 orthodontic fixed bracket systems.
    Pringle AM; Petrie A; Cunningham SJ; McKnight M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Aug; 136(2):160-7. PubMed ID: 19651344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Frictional evaluations of dental typodont models using four self-ligating designs and a conventional design.
    Henao SP; Kusy RP
    Angle Orthod; 2005 Jan; 75(1):75-85. PubMed ID: 15747819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Forces exerted by conventional and self-ligating brackets during simulated first- and second-order corrections.
    Pandis N; Eliades T; Partowi S; Bourauel C
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 May; 133(5):738-42. PubMed ID: 18456148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: a single-center randomized controlled trial.
    Songra G; Clover M; Atack NE; Ewings P; Sherriff M; Sandy JR; Ireland AJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 May; 145(5):569-78. PubMed ID: 24785921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets versus conventional stainless steel twin brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet (saliva) states.
    Thorstenson GA; Kusy RP
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 Oct; 120(4):361-70. PubMed ID: 11606960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Does the design of self-ligating brackets show different behavior in terms of friction?
    Tecco S; Marzo G; Di Bisceglie B; Crincoli V; Tetè S; Festa F
    Orthodontics (Chic.); 2011; 12(4):330-9. PubMed ID: 22299106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of the frictional resistance of conventional and self-ligating bracket designs using standardized archwires and dental typodonts.
    Henao SP; Kusy RP
    Angle Orthod; 2004 Apr; 74(2):202-11. PubMed ID: 15132446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Resistance to sliding with 3 types of elastomeric modules.
    Griffiths HS; Sherriff M; Ireland AJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Jun; 127(6):670-5; quiz 754. PubMed ID: 15953891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Numeric modeling of torque capabilities of self-ligating and conventional brackets.
    Huang Y; Keilig L; Rahimi A; Reimann S; Eliades T; Jäger A; Bourauel C
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Nov; 136(5):638-43. PubMed ID: 19892278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 43.