252 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23299650)
1. Systematic review on self-ligating vs. conventional brackets: initial pain, number of visits, treatment time.
Čelar A; Schedlberger M; Dörfler P; Bertl M
J Orofac Orthop; 2013 Jan; 74(1):40-51. PubMed ID: 23299650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Differences between active and passive self-ligating brackets for orthodontic treatment : Systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized clinical trials.
Yang X; He Y; Chen T; Zhao M; Yan Y; Wang H; Bai D
J Orofac Orthop; 2017 Mar; 78(2):121-128. PubMed ID: 28224175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Different bracket-archwire combinations for simulated correction of two-dimensional tooth malalignment: Leveling outcomes and initial force systems.
Holtmann S; Konermann A; Keilig L; Reimann S; Jäger A; Montasser M; El-Bialy T; Bourauel C
J Orofac Orthop; 2014 Nov; 75(6):459-70. PubMed ID: 25344125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. An in vitro study into the efficacy of complex tooth alignment with conventional and self-ligating brackets.
Montasser MA; Keilig L; Bourauel C
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2015 Feb; 18(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 25264808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Root resorption, treatment time and extraction rate during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating and conventional brackets.
Jacobs C; Gebhardt PF; Jacobs V; Hechtner M; Meila D; Wehrbein H
Head Face Med; 2014 Jan; 10():2. PubMed ID: 24456620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional edgewise twin brackets: a prospective randomized clinical trial.
Johansson K; Lundström F
Angle Orthod; 2012 Sep; 82(5):929-34. PubMed ID: 22397386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Transversal changes, space closure, and efficiency of conventional and self-ligating appliances : A quantitative systematic review.
Yang X; Xue C; He Y; Zhao M; Luo M; Wang P; Bai D
J Orofac Orthop; 2018 Jan; 79(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 29101414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets: A systematic review.
Dehbi H; Azaroual MF; Zaoui F; Halimi A; Benyahia H
Int Orthod; 2017 Sep; 15(3):297-311. PubMed ID: 28778722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of the efficacy of tooth alignment among lingual and labial brackets: an in vitro study.
Alobeid A; El-Bialy T; Reimann S; Keilig L; Cornelius D; Jäger A; Bourauel C
Eur J Orthod; 2018 Nov; 40(6):660-665. PubMed ID: 29546390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Root resorption of self-ligating and conventional preadjusted brackets in severe anterior crowding Class I patients: a longitudinal retrospective study.
Chen W; Haq AA; Zhou Y
BMC Oral Health; 2015 Oct; 15():115. PubMed ID: 26427531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Perception of discomfort during initial orthodontic tooth alignment using a self-ligating or conventional bracket system: a randomized clinical trial.
Scott P; Sherriff M; Dibiase AT; Cobourne MT
Eur J Orthod; 2008 Jun; 30(3):227-32. PubMed ID: 18339656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Root resorption during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating or conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Yi J; Li M; Li Y; Li X; Zhao Z
BMC Oral Health; 2016 Nov; 16(1):125. PubMed ID: 27871255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Friction behavior of self-ligating and conventional brackets with different ligature systems.
Szczupakowski A; Reimann S; Dirk C; Keilig L; Weber A; Jäger A; Bourauel C
J Orofac Orthop; 2016 Jul; 77(4):287-95. PubMed ID: 27220902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of transverse maxillary dental arch width changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets in patients requiring premolar extraction - A randomised clinical trial.
Bashir R; Sonar S; Batra P; Srivastava A; Singla A
Int Orthod; 2019 Dec; 17(4):687-692. PubMed ID: 31466930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Archwire diameter effect on tooth alignment with different bracket-archwire combinations.
Montasser MA; Keilig L; Bourauel C
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Jan; 149(1):76-83. PubMed ID: 26718381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
