169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24592905)
1. Craniofacial features of patients with sickle cell anemia and sickle cell trait.
Pithon MM; Palmeira LM; Barbosa AA; Pereira R; de Andrade AC; Coqueiro Rda S
Angle Orthod; 2014 Sep; 84(5):825-9. PubMed ID: 24592905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Lateral cephalometric diagnosis of asymmetry in Angle Class II subdivision compared to Class I and II.
Meloti AF; Gonçalves Rde C; Silva E; Martins LP; dos Santos-Pinto A
Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(4):80-8. PubMed ID: 25279525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Facial features of patients with sickle cell anemia.
Maia NG; dos Santos LA; Coletta RD; Mendes PH; Bonan PR; Maia LB; Junior HM
Angle Orthod; 2011 Jan; 81(1):115-20. PubMed ID: 20936963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Facial soft-tissue thickness in patients affected by bilateral cleft lip and palate: a retrospective cone-beam computed tomography study.
Celikoglu M; Buyuk SK; Sekerci AE; Ersoz M; Celik S; Sisman Y
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Nov; 146(5):573-8. PubMed ID: 25439207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Morphometry of the cranial base and the cranial-cervical-mandibular system in young patients with type II, division 1 malocclusion, using tomographic cone beam.
Bedoya A; Landa Nieto Z; Zuluaga LL; Rocabado M
Cranio; 2014 Jul; 32(3):199-207. PubMed ID: 25000162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of landmark identification and linear and angular measurements in conventional and digital cephalometry.
Akhare PJ; Dagab AM; Alle RS; Shenoyd U; Garla V
Int J Comput Dent; 2013; 16(3):241-54. PubMed ID: 24364195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Linear accuracy and reliability of cone beam CT derived 3-dimensional images constructed using an orthodontic volumetric rendering program.
Periago DR; Scarfe WC; Moshiri M; Scheetz JP; Silveira AM; Farman AG
Angle Orthod; 2008 May; 78(3):387-95. PubMed ID: 18416632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics.
Major PW; Johnson DE; Hesse KL; Glover KE
Angle Orthod; 1994; 64(6):447-54. PubMed ID: 7864466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cephalometric norms of a Burkina Faso population.
Ouédraogo Y; Benyahia H; Diouf JS; Camara T; Bationo R; Ngom PI
Int Orthod; 2019 Mar; 17(1):136-142. PubMed ID: 30772356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Precision of measurements on conventional negative 'bones white' and inverted greyscale 'bones black' digital lateral cephalograms.
Borrie F; Thomson D; McIntyre GT
Eur J Orthod; 2012 Feb; 34(1):57-61. PubMed ID: 21300728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Radiographic assessment of lower third molar eruption in different anteroposterior skeletal patterns and age-related groups.
Jakovljevic A; Lazic E; Soldatovic I; Nedeljkovic N; Andric M
Angle Orthod; 2015 Jul; 85(4):577-84. PubMed ID: 25244087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Changes in skeletal and dental relationship in Class II Division I malocclusion after rapid maxillary expansion: a prospective study.
Baratieri C; Alves M; Bolognese AM; Nojima MC; Nojima LI
Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(3):75-81. PubMed ID: 25162569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluation of the accuracy of linear measurements on lateral cephalograms obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans with digital lateral cephalometric radiography: an in vitro study.
Shokri A; Khajeh S; Khavid A
J Craniofac Surg; 2014 Sep; 25(5):1710-3. PubMed ID: 25203572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is it possible to use cross-sectional and vertical facial measurements to establish the shape of the mandibular arch?
El Haje OA; Pompeo DD; Furtado GC; Rivera LM; Paranhos LR
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2014 Nov; 15(6):735-9. PubMed ID: 25825099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reproducibility of maxillofacial anatomic landmarks on 3-dimensional computed tomographic images determined with the 95% confidence ellipse method.
Muramatsu A; Nawa H; Kimura M; Yoshida K; Maeda M; Katsumata A; Ariji E; Goto S
Angle Orthod; 2008 May; 78(3):396-402. PubMed ID: 18416622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements obtained from digital photographs of analogue headfilms.
Grybauskas S; Balciuniene I; Vetra J
Stomatologija; 2007; 9(4):114-20. PubMed ID: 18303276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Craniofacial morphology of the frontonasal segment in patients with one or two macrodontic maxillary central incisors.
Kenrad AB; Christensen IJ; Kjær I
Eur J Orthod; 2013 Jun; 35(3):329-34. PubMed ID: 23041936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Radiographic evaluation of orthodontic treatment by means of four different cephalometric superimposition methods.
Lenza MA; Carvalho AA; Lenza EB; Lenza MG; Torres HM; Souza JB
Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(3):29-36. PubMed ID: 26154453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Perioral soft tissue evaluation of skeletal Class II Division 1: A lateral cephalometric study.
Lee YJ; Park JT; Cha JY
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Sep; 148(3):405-13. PubMed ID: 26321338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Craniofacial parameters of Syrian children with β-thalassemia major.
Takriti M; Dashash M
J Investig Clin Dent; 2011 May; 2(2):135-43. PubMed ID: 25426607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
