446 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20337101)
1. [Dentaoalveolar changes in young adult patients with class II/1 malocclusion treated with the herbst appliance and an activator].
Nedeljković N; Sćepan I; Glisić B; Marković E
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2010 Feb; 67(2):170-5. PubMed ID: 20337101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Herbst appliance with skeletal anchorage versus dental anchorage in adolescents with Class II malocclusion: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Batista KBDSL; Lima T; Palomares N; Carvalho FA; Quintão C; Miguel JAM; Lin YL; Su TL; O'Brien K
Trials; 2017 Nov; 18(1):564. PubMed ID: 29178932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of skeletal and dental changes in patients with a Class II relationship treated with clear aligner mandibular advancement and Herbst appliance followed by comprehensive orthodontic treatment.
Hosseini HR; Ngan P; Tai SK; Andrews LJ; Xiang J
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2024 Feb; 165(2):205-219. PubMed ID: 37831020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A retrospective cephalometric investigation of two fixed functional orthodontic appliances in class II treatment: Functional Mandibular Advancer vs. Herbst appliance.
Kinzinger GSM; Lisson JA; Frye L; Gross U; Hourfar J
Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Jan; 22(1):293-304. PubMed ID: 28365810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparison of the Herbst and Fränkel appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion.
McNamara JA; Howe RP; Dischinger TG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1990 Aug; 98(2):134-44. PubMed ID: 2378319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation.
Pancherz H
Am J Orthod; 1982 Aug; 82(2):104-13. PubMed ID: 6961781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Herbst appliance combined with a completely customized lingual appliance: A retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.
Mujagic M; Pandis N; Fleming PS; Katsaros C
Int Orthod; 2020 Dec; 18(4):732-738. PubMed ID: 32839142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mechanisms of Class II correction induced by the crown Herbst appliance as a single-phase Class II therapy: 1 year follow-up.
Jakobsone G; Latkauskiene D; McNamara JA
Prog Orthod; 2013 Sep; 14():27. PubMed ID: 24326090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Class II malocclusion treatment with the Herbst appliance in patients after the growth peak.
Alvares JC; Cançado RH; Valarelli FP; de Freitas KM; Angheben CZ
Dental Press J Orthod; 2013; 18(5):38-45. PubMed ID: 24352386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Herbst appliance treatment of Class II, division 2 malocclusions.
Obijou C; Pancherz H
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1997 Sep; 112(3):287-91. PubMed ID: 9294358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Dental skeletal effects of the metallic splinted Herbst appliance after growth spurt: a lateral oblique cephalometric assessment.
Raveli TB; Raveli DB; Gandini LG; Santos-Pinto A
Acta Odontol Latinoam; 2017 Aug; 30(2):76-82. PubMed ID: 29248942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Maxillary molar distalization or mandibular enhancement: a cephalometric comparison of comprehensive orthodontic treatment including the pendulum and the Herbst appliances.
Burkhardt DR; McNamara JA; Baccetti T
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Feb; 123(2):108-16. PubMed ID: 12594414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does mandibular advancement with clear aligners have the same skeletal and dentoalveolar effects as traditional functional appliances?
Wu Y; Yu Q; Xia Y; Wang B; Chen S; Gu K; Zhang B; Zhu M
BMC Oral Health; 2023 Feb; 23(1):65. PubMed ID: 36732724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Comparison of Twin Block appliance and Herbst appliance in the treatment of Class II malocclusion among children: a meta-analysis.
Xu F; Fang Y; Sui X; Yao Y
BMC Oral Health; 2024 Feb; 24(1):278. PubMed ID: 38409017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Treatment effects of a twin-force bite corrector versus an activator in comparison with an untreated Class II sample: a preliminary report.
Dalci O; Altug AT; Memikoglu UT
Aust Orthod J; 2014 May; 30(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 24968645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
