446 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20337101)
21. Dentoskeletal effects of Twin Block and Herbst appliances in patients with Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy.
Baysal A; Uysal T
Eur J Orthod; 2014 Apr; 36(2):164-72. PubMed ID: 24663007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Three-dimensional comparison of the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of the Herbst and Pendulum appliances followed by fixed appliances: A CBCT study.
Taylor KL; Evangelista K; Muniz L; Ruellas ACO; Valladares-Neto J; McNamara J; Franchi L; Kim-Berman H; Cevidanes LHS
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2020 Feb; 23(1):72-81. PubMed ID: 31514261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Treatment effects of skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ and Herbst appliances: A retrospective clinical study.
Celikoglu M; Buyuk SK; Ekizer A; Unal T
Angle Orthod; 2016 Mar; 86(2):306-14. PubMed ID: 26258899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Treatment of Class II division 2 malocclusion with herbst appliance in young adults].
Sang T; Wu J; Huang Z; Zheng Y
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2012 Feb; 30(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 22389966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Vertical dentofacial changes during Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation.
Pancherz H
Swed Dent J Suppl; 1982; 15():189-96. PubMed ID: 6963773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents and young adults during Herbst treatment: A prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Jun; 115(6):607-18. PubMed ID: 10358242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Changes in soft tissue profile following the treatment using a Herbst appliance--a photographic analysis.
Nedeljković N; Cubrilo D; Hadzi-Mihailović M
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2014 Jan; 71(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 24516984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Mandibular propulsion appliance for adults with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
González Espinosa D; Santos M; Mendes SMDA; Normando D
Eur J Orthod; 2020 Apr; 42(2):163-173. PubMed ID: 31786599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. [Treatment of Class II malocclusion using the Herbst appliance].
Schiavoni R
Mondo Ortod; 1990; 15(1):11-23. PubMed ID: 2402252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Herbst/multibracket appliance treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusions in early and late adulthood. a prospective cephalometric study of consecutively treated subjects.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Eur J Orthod; 2006 Aug; 28(4):352-60. PubMed ID: 16644850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [Orthodontic treatment of nongrowing patient with Class II Division 2 malocclusion by Herbst appliance].
Nedeljković N; Glisić B; Marković E; Sćepan I; Stamenković Z
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2009 Oct; 66(10):840-4. PubMed ID: 19938765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Effects of Class II division 1 malocclusion treatment with three types of fixed functional appliances.
Brito DBA; Henriques JFC; Fiedler CF; Janson G
Dental Press J Orthod; 2019; 24(5):30-39. PubMed ID: 31721944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Dentoskeletal effects during Herbst-Multibracket appliance treatment: a comparison of lingual and labial approaches.
Bock NC; Ruf S; Wiechmann D; Jilek T
Eur J Orthod; 2016 Oct; 38(5):470-7. PubMed ID: 26378084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial.
O'Brien K; Wright J; Conboy F; Sanjie Y; Mandall N; Chadwick S; Connolly I; Cook P; Birnie D; Hammond M; Harradine N; Lewis D; McDade C; Mitchell L; Murray A; O'Neill J; Read M; Robinson S; Roberts-Harry D; Sandler J; Shaw I
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Aug; 124(2):128-37. PubMed ID: 12923506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [Treatment using the Lehman apparatus in patients with malocclusion in light of teleradiologic tests and dental arch measurements].
Bielawska H
Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2002; 48():195-212. PubMed ID: 14601478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Effect of the MARA appliance on the position of the lower anteriors in children, adolescents and adults with Class II malocclusion.
Gönner U; Ozkan V; Jahn E; Toll DE
J Orofac Orthop; 2007 Sep; 68(5):397-412. PubMed ID: 17882366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Differential skeletal and dental effects after orthodontic treatment with bite jumping appliance or activator: a retrospective cephalometric study.
Hourfar J; Kinzinger GSM; Euchner L; Lisson JA
Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Jul; 24(7):2513-2521. PubMed ID: 31705310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Intensive treatment of severe Class II malocclusions with a headgear-Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition.
Wieslander L
Am J Orthod; 1984 Jul; 86(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 6588755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
