411 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24946129)
1. The influence of bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy on submental-cervical aesthetics.
Soydan SS; Uckan S; Ustdal A; Bayram B; Bayrak B
J Oral Rehabil; 2014 Nov; 41(11):816-21. PubMed ID: 24946129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Consideration of effect of the amount of mandibular setback on the submental region in the planning of orthodontic-orthognathic treatment.
Ghassemi M; Hilgers RD; Jamilian A; Hölzle F; Fritz U; Gerressen M; Ghassemi A
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Apr; 52(4):334-9. PubMed ID: 24593896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Stability of skeletal Class II correction with 2 surgical techniques: the sagittal split ramus osteotomy and the total mandibular subapical alveolar osteotomy.
Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; Berger JL; Kaczynski R; Shunock M
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 Aug; 120(2):134-43. PubMed ID: 11500654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Orthognathic surgery for correction of patients with mandibular excess: don't forget to assess the gonial angle.
Guglielmi M; Schneider KM; Iannetti G; Feng C; Martinez AY
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Jun; 71(6):1063-72. PubMed ID: 23541992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Long term stability of mandibular advancement procedures: bilateral sagittal split osteotomy versus distraction osteogenesis.
Baas EM; Pijpe J; de Lange J
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Feb; 41(2):137-41. PubMed ID: 22137334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of postoperative stability of three rigid internal fixation techniques after sagittal split ramus osteotomy for mandibular advancement.
Sato FR; Asprino L; Fernandes Moreira RW; de Moraes M
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2014 Jul; 42(5):e224-9. PubMed ID: 24103461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The relationship between the changes in three-dimensional facial morphology and mandibular movement after orthognathic surgery.
Kim DS; Huh KH; Lee SS; Heo MS; Choi SC; Hwang SJ; Yi WJ
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2013 Oct; 41(7):686-93. PubMed ID: 23465640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Do patients treated with bimaxillary surgery have more stable condylar positions than those who have undergone single-jaw surgery?
Kim YJ; Oh KM; Hong JS; Lee JH; Kim HM; Reyes M; Cevidanes LH; Park YH
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Sep; 70(9):2143-52. PubMed ID: 22115974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative study of skeletal stability between bicortical resorbable and titanium screw fixation after sagittal split ramus osteotomy for mandibular prognathism.
Paeng JY; Hong J; Kim CS; Kim MJ
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2012 Dec; 40(8):660-4. PubMed ID: 22209495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Positional changes of the masseter and medial pterygoid muscles after surgical mandibular advancement procedures: an MRI study.
Dicker GJ; Koolstra JH; Castelijns JA; Van Schijndel RA; Tuinzing DB
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Aug; 41(8):922-9. PubMed ID: 22418077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Bi-maxillary advancement surgery: Technique, indications and results.
Olivi P; Garcia C
Int Orthod; 2014 Jun; 12(2):200-12. PubMed ID: 24813103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Surgical prediction of skeletal and soft tissue changes in treatment of Class II.
de Lira Ade L; de Moura WL; Artese F; Bittencourt MA; Nojima LI
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2013 Apr; 41(3):198-203. PubMed ID: 23201327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Vertical ramus elongation and mandibular advancement by endobuccal approach: Presentation of a new osteotomy technique.
Grimaud F; Bertin H; Fauvel F; Corre P; Perrin JP
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Feb; 118(1):66-69. PubMed ID: 28330579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of minimal versus conventional presurgical orthodontics in skeletal class III patients treated with two-jaw surgery.
Joh B; Bayome M; Park JH; Park JU; Kim Y; Kook YA
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Oct; 71(10):1733-41. PubMed ID: 23932114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An esthetic treatment outcome of orthognathic surgery and dentofacial orthopedics in class II treatment: a cephalometric study.
Kabbur KJ; Hemanth M; Patil GS; Sathyadeep V; Shamnur N; Harieesha KB; Praveen GR
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2012 Sep; 13(5):602-6. PubMed ID: 23250160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Transverse stability of the proximal segment after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy for mandibular setback surgery.
Yoo JY; Kwon YD; Suh JH; Ko SJ; Lee B; Lee JW; Kim EC; Girod S
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Aug; 42(8):994-1000. PubMed ID: 23538214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Skeletal and dental variables related to the stability of orthognathic surgery in skeletal Class III malocclusion with a surgery-first approach.
Ko EW; Lin SC; Chen YR; Huang CS
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 May; 71(5):e215-23. PubMed ID: 23455415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of two imaging programs in predicting the soft tissue changes with mandibular advancement surgery.
Ravindranath S; Krishnaswamy NR; Sundaram V
Orthodontics (Chic.); 2011; 12(4):354-65. PubMed ID: 22299108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Modified technique used for sagittal splitting of the mandible.
Loncle T; Bontemps P; Bénaicha M
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Jun; 118(3):193-196. PubMed ID: 28391077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The stability of bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomy and vertical ramus osteotomy after bimaxillary correction of class III malocclusion.
Abeltins A; Jakobsone G; Urtane I; Bigestans A
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2011 Dec; 39(8):583-7. PubMed ID: 21334219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
