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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23151699)

  • 1. Comparison of Opal self-ligating brackets with manually ligating brackets.
    Deshpande A; Srinivas N; Kumar KK; Mapare S
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Jul; 13(4):494-503. PubMed ID: 23151699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Shear bond strength comparison between two orthodontic adhesives and self-ligating and conventional brackets.
    Northrup RG; Berzins DW; Bradley TG; Schuckit W
    Angle Orthod; 2007 Jul; 77(4):701-6. PubMed ID: 17605477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bond failure in clinical practice.
    Ewing M
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 Nov; 25(2):128-35. PubMed ID: 20043547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Leveling and alignment time and the periodontal status in patients with severe upper crowding treated by corticotomy-assisted self-ligating brackets in comparison with conventional or self-ligating brackets only: a 3-arm randomized controlled clinical trial.
    Al-Ibrahim HM; Hajeer MY; Alkhouri I; Zinah E
    J World Fed Orthod; 2022 Feb; 11(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 34688577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Shear bond strengths of plastic brackets with a mechanical base.
    Liu JK; Chang LT; Chuang SF; Shieh DB
    Angle Orthod; 2002 Apr; 72(2):141-5. PubMed ID: 11999937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The influence of orthodontic bracket base design on shear bond strength.
    Sharma-Sayal SK; Rossouw PE; Kulkarni GV; Titley KC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Jul; 124(1):74-82. PubMed ID: 12867901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of white spot lesion formation between a self-ligating bracket and a conventional preadjusted straight wire bracket.
    Polat Ö; Gökçelik A; Arman A; Arhun N
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):e46-50. PubMed ID: 19641768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of bond strength between simple foil mesh and laser-structured base retention brackets.
    Sorel O; El Alam R; Chagneau F; Cathelineau G
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Sep; 122(3):260-6. PubMed ID: 12226606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Time efficiency of self-ligating vs conventional brackets in orthodontics: effect of appliances and ligating systems.
    Paduano S; Cioffi I; Iodice G; Rapuano A; Silva R
    Prog Orthod; 2008; 9(2):74-80. PubMed ID: 19350061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bond strength: a comparison between chemical coated and mechanical interlock bases of ceramic and metal brackets.
    Wang WN; Meng CL; Tarng TH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1997 Apr; 111(4):374-81. PubMed ID: 9109582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Bond failure rates of two self-ligating brackets: a randomised clinical trial.
    Chapman JL
    Aust Orthod J; 2011 Nov; 27(2):139-44. PubMed ID: 22372270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. A multi-center randomized controlled trial to compare a self-ligating bracket with a conventional bracket in a UK population: Part 1: Treatment efficiency.
    O'Dywer L; Littlewood SJ; Rahman S; Spencer RJ; Barber SK; Russell JS
    Angle Orthod; 2016 Jan; 86(1):142-8. PubMed ID: 25853795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Force levels in complex tooth alignment with conventional and self-ligating brackets.
    Montasser MA; El-Bialy T; Keilig L; Reimann S; Jäger A; Bourauel C
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Apr; 143(4):507-14. PubMed ID: 23561412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accuracy of positioning three types of self-ligating brackets compared with a conventionally ligating bracket.
    Birdsall J; Hunt NP; Sabbah W; Moseley HC
    J Orthod; 2012 Mar; 39(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 22433325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets.
    Hamilton R; Goonewardene MS; Murray K
    Aust Orthod J; 2008 Nov; 24(2):102-9. PubMed ID: 19113074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Plasma arc curing of ceramic brackets: an evaluation of shear bond strength and debonding characteristics.
    Klocke A; Korbmacher HM; Huck LG; Ghosh J; Kahl-Nieke B
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Sep; 124(3):309-15. PubMed ID: 12970665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of sandblasting on the retention of orthodontic brackets: a controlled clinical trial.
    Sunna S; Rock WP
    J Orthod; 2008 Mar; 35(1):43-8. PubMed ID: 18287394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.