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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23304967)

  • 1. An investigation of cephalometric and morphological predictors of successful twin block therapy.
    Fleming PS; Qureshi U; Pandis N; DiBiase A; Lee RT
    Aust Orthod J; 2012 Nov; 28(2):190-6. PubMed ID: 23304967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes concurrent to use of Twin Block appliance in class II division I cases with a deficient mandible: a cephalometric study.
    Sharma AK; Sachdev V; Singla A; Kirtaniya BC
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2012; 30(3):218-26. PubMed ID: 23263425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Growth modulation using functional appliances--cephalometric predictors of successful response.
    Kumar SA; Shetty KS; Prakash AT
    Orthodontics (Chic.); 2013; 14(1):e50-9. PubMed ID: 23646338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. An extended period of functional appliance therapy: a controlled clinical trial comparing the Twin Block and Dynamax appliances.
    Lee RT; Barnes E; DiBiase A; Govender R; Qureshi U
    Eur J Orthod; 2014 Oct; 36(5):512-21. PubMed ID: 23291502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparision of Twin-block and Forsus (FRD) functional appliance--a cephalometric study.
    Mahamad IK; Neela PK; Mascarenhas R; Husain A
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012; 23(3):49-58. PubMed ID: 23094559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An evaluation of maxillary and mandibular rotational responses with the Clark twin block appliance.
    Lau EY; Sampson WJ; Townsend GC; Hughes T
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 19634464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Cephalometric study to test the reliability of anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy indicators using the twin block appliance.
    Trivedi R; Bhattacharya A; Mehta F; Patel D; Parekh H; Gandhi V
    Prog Orthod; 2015 Feb; 16():3. PubMed ID: 25769138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of the reciprocal mini-chin cup appliance.
    Aslan BI; Dinçer M
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Feb; 30(1):80-8. PubMed ID: 18276929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and MARA functional appliances.
    Siara-Olds NJ; Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; Berger J; Bayirli B
    Angle Orthod; 2010 Jan; 80(1):18-29. PubMed ID: 19852635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Orthodontic treatment changes of chin position in Class II Division 1 patients.
    LaHaye MB; Buschang PH; Alexander RG; Boley JC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Dec; 130(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 17169735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Predictive value of molar bite force on Class II functional appliance treatment outcomes.
    Antonarakis GS; Kjellberg H; Kiliaridis S
    Eur J Orthod; 2012 Apr; 34(2):244-9. PubMed ID: 21411476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of differential growth and orthodontic treatment outcome by regional cephalometric superpositions.
    Efstratiadis SS; Cohen G; Ghafari J
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Jun; 69(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 10371427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Glenoid fossa position in Class II malocclusion associated with mandibular retrusion.
    Giuntini V; De Toffol L; Franchi L; Baccetti T
    Angle Orthod; 2008 Sep; 78(5):808-12. PubMed ID: 18298205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Two-phase treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion with the combination of the twin-block appliance and high-pull headgear.
    Lv Y; Yan B; Wang L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Aug; 142(2):246-55. PubMed ID: 22858335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Twin-block and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: a comparative study.
    Jena AK; Duggal R; Parkash H
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):594-602. PubMed ID: 17110256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 1. Hard tissue changes.
    Gill DS; Lee RT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):465-72; quiz 517. PubMed ID: 15821691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of the effects of monoblock and twin-block appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures.
    Tümer N; Gültan AS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Oct; 116(4):460-8. PubMed ID: 10511676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Early functional treatment in Class II division 1 subjects with mandibular retrognathia using Fränkel II appliance. A prospective controlled study.
    Silvestrini-Biavati A; Alberti G; Silvestrini Biavati F; Signori A; Castaldo A; Migliorati M
    Eur J Paediatr Dent; 2012 Dec; 13(4):301-6. PubMed ID: 23270288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.