536 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24182587)
1. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary changes associated with facemask and rapid maxillary expansion compared with bone anchored maxillary protraction.
Hino CT; Cevidanes LH; Nguyen TT; De Clerck HJ; Franchi L; McNamara JA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Nov; 144(5):705-14. PubMed ID: 24182587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion.
Cevidanes L; Baccetti T; Franchi L; McNamara JA; De Clerck H
Angle Orthod; 2010 Sep; 80(5):799-806. PubMed ID: 20578848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Three-dimensional evaluation of the maxillary effects of two orthopaedic protocols for the treatment of Class III malocclusion: A prospective study.
Fischer B; Masucci C; Ruellas A; Cevidanes L; Giuntini V; Nieri M; Nardi C; Franchi L; McNamara JA; Defraia E
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2018 Nov; 21(4):248-257. PubMed ID: 30253035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of two maxillary protraction protocols: tooth-borne versus bone-anchored protraction facemask treatment.
Ngan P; Wilmes B; Drescher D; Martin C; Weaver B; Gunel E
Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():26. PubMed ID: 26303311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Three-dimensional alterations in pharyngeal airway and maxillary sinus volumes in Class III maxillary deficiency subjects undergoing orthopedic facemask treatment.
Pamporakis P; Nevzatoğlu Ş; Küçükkeleş N
Angle Orthod; 2014 Jul; 84(4):701-7. PubMed ID: 24417494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Long-term results of surgically assisted maxillary protraction vs regular facemask.
Nevzatoğlu S; Küçükkeleş N
Angle Orthod; 2014 Nov; 84(6):1002-9. PubMed ID: 24654941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Zygomaticomaxillary suture maturation: Part II-The influence of sutural maturation on the response to maxillary protraction.
Angelieri F; Ruellas AC; Yatabe MS; Cevidanes LHS; Franchi L; Toyama-Hino C; De Clerck HJ; Nguyen T; McNamara JA
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2017 Aug; 20(3):152-163. PubMed ID: 28660731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Application and effectiveness of a mini-implant- and tooth-borne rapid palatal expansion device: the hybrid hyrax.
Wilmes B; Nienkemper M; Drescher D
World J Orthod; 2010; 11(4):323-30. PubMed ID: 21490997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of face mask treatment with and without rapid maxillary expansion in young adult subjects.
Halicioglu K; Yavuz I; Ceylan I; Erdem A
Angle Orthod; 2014 Sep; 84(5):853-61. PubMed ID: 24628408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The short-term treatment effects of face mask therapy in Class III patients based on the anchorage device: miniplates vs rapid maxillary expansion.
Lee NK; Yang IH; Baek SH
Angle Orthod; 2012 Sep; 82(5):846-52. PubMed ID: 22264134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Three-dimensional assessment of mandibular and glenoid fossa changes after bone-anchored Class III intermaxillary traction.
De Clerck H; Nguyen T; de Paula LK; Cevidanes L
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Jul; 142(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 22748987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Transverse, vertical, and anterior-posterior changes between tooth-anchored versus Dresden bone-anchored rapid maxillary expansion 6 months post-expansion: A CBCT randomized controlled clinical trial.
Lagravère MO; Ling CP; Woo J; Harzer W; Major PW; Carey JP
Int Orthod; 2020 Jun; 18(2):308-316. PubMed ID: 32057733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The efficacy of maxillary protraction protocols with the micro-implant-assisted rapid palatal expander (MARPE) and the novel N2 mini-implant-a finite element study.
Moon W; Wu KW; MacGinnis M; Sung J; Chu H; Youssef G; Machado A
Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():16. PubMed ID: 26061987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A retrospective comparison of two protocols for correction of skeletal Class III malocclusion in prepubertal children: hybrid hyrax expander with mandibular miniplates and rapid maxillary expansion with face mask.
Tarraf NE; Dalci O; Dalci K; Altug AT; Darendeliler MA
Prog Orthod; 2023 Jan; 24(1):3. PubMed ID: 36683080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Bone-anchored maxillary protraction therapy in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate: 3-dimensional assessment of maxillary effects.
Yatabe M; Garib DG; Faco RAS; de Clerck H; Janson G; Nguyen T; Cevidanes LHS; Ruellas AC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Sep; 152(3):327-335. PubMed ID: 28863913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage.
Sar C; Arman-Özçırpıcı A; Uçkan S; Yazıcı AC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 May; 139(5):636-49. PubMed ID: 21536207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparison of maxillary posterior changes following facemask therapy: Skeletal anchorage versus tooth-borne anchorage.
Lee HJ; Jeong H; Park JH; Choi DS; Jang I; Cha BK
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2024 Apr; 27(2):303-312. PubMed ID: 37955169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Three-dimensional comparative evaluation of customized bone-anchored vs tooth-borne maxillary protraction in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion.
Liang S; Wang F; Chang Q; Bai Y
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Sep; 160(3):374-384. PubMed ID: 34172344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Short-term effects of a modified Alt-RAMEC protocol for early treatment of Class III malocclusion: a controlled study.
Masucci C; Franchi L; Giuntini V; Defraia E
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2014 Nov; 17(4):259-69. PubMed ID: 25041370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of Class III bone anchor treatment on airway.
Nguyen T; De Clerck H; Wilson M; Golden B
Angle Orthod; 2015 Jul; 85(4):591-6. PubMed ID: 25245416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
