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.
246 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21478298)
1. Comparison of self- and conventional-ligating brackets in the alignment stage. Wahab RM; Idris H; Yacob H; Ariffin SH Eur J Orthod; 2012 Apr; 34(2):176-81. PubMed ID: 21478298 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The timing of significant arch dimensional changes with fixed orthodontic appliances: data from a multicenter randomised controlled trial. Fleming PS; Lee RT; Mcdonald T; Pandis N; Johal A J Dent; 2014 Jan; 42(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 24269833 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Mini-screw implant or transpalatal arch-mediated anchorage reinforcement during canine retraction: a randomized clinical trial. Sharma M; Sharma V; Khanna B J Orthod; 2012 Jun; 39(2):102-10. PubMed ID: 22773673 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Geometric morphometric evaluations of a randomized prospective split-mouth study on modes of ligation and reverse-curve mechanics. Celar AG; Onodera K; Bertl MH; Astl E; Bantleon HP; Sato S; Mitteroecker P Orthod Craniofac Res; 2014 Aug; 17(3):158-69. PubMed ID: 24720396 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Porcelain brackets during initial alignment: are self-ligating cosmetic brackets more efficient? Miles P; Weyant R Aust Orthod J; 2010 May; 26(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 20575195 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. A clinical comparison of three aligning archwires in terms of alignment efficiency: A prospective clinical trial. Abdelrahman RSh; Al-Nimri KS; Al Maaitah EF Angle Orthod; 2015 May; 85(3):434-9. PubMed ID: 25090135 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Canine retraction and anchorage loss: self-ligating versus conventional brackets in a randomized split-mouth study. da Costa Monini A; Júnior LG; Martins RP; Vianna AP Angle Orthod; 2014 Sep; 84(5):846-52. PubMed ID: 24592906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Correction of horizontal and vertical discrepancies with a new interactive self-ligating bracket system: the Quick system. Cacciafesta V; Sfondrini MF World J Orthod; 2010; 11(4):404-12. PubMed ID: 21491009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances. Fleming PS; DiBiase AT; Sarri G; Lee RT Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Sep; 136(3):340-7. PubMed ID: 19732667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparative assessment of the forces and moments generated at the maxillary incisors between conventional and self-ligating brackets using a reverse curve of Spee NiTi archwire. Sifakakis I; Pandis N; Makou M; Eliades T; Bourauel C Aust Orthod J; 2010 Nov; 26(2):127-33. PubMed ID: 21175021 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Finishing effectiveness of different archwires using SmartClip™ self-ligating brackets: a clinical study. Ferrari S; Bellincampi M; Sfondrini MF; Caprioglio A; Gandini P Int Orthod; 2014 Mar; 12(1):125-38. PubMed ID: 24456630 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Transversal maxillary dento-alveolar changes in patients treated with active and passive self-ligating brackets: a randomized clinical trial using CBCT-scans and digital models. Cattaneo PM; Treccani M; Carlsson K; Thorgeirsson T; Myrda A; Cevidanes LH; Melsen B Orthod Craniofac Res; 2011 Nov; 14(4):222-33. PubMed ID: 22008302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The effects of a vibrational appliance on tooth movement and patient discomfort: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Miles P; Smith H; Weyant R; Rinchuse DJ Aust Orthod J; 2012 Nov; 28(2):213-8. PubMed ID: 23304970 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of maxillary arch dimensional changes with passive and active self-ligation and conventional brackets in the permanent dentition: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Fleming PS; Lee RT; Marinho V; Johal A Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Aug; 144(2):185-93. PubMed ID: 23910199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Alignment efficiency and discomfort of three orthodontic archwire sequences: a randomized clinical trial. Ong E; Ho C; Miles P J Orthod; 2011 Mar; 38(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 21367826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Orthodontic forces released by low-friction versus conventional systems during alignment of apically or buccally malposed teeth. Baccetti T; Franchi L; Camporesi M; Defraia E Eur J Orthod; 2011 Feb; 33(1):50-4. PubMed ID: 20631083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of the kinetic frictional force between conventional plastic brackets with thermoplastic low-friction module ligation and self-ligating brackets. Yanase Y; Ioi H; Uehara M; Hara A; Nakata S; Nakasima A; Counts AL World J Orthod; 2009; 10(3):220-3. PubMed ID: 19885424 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]