276 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24968645)
1. Treatment effects of a twin-force bite corrector versus an activator in comparison with an untreated Class II sample: a preliminary report.
Dalci O; Altug AT; Memikoglu UT
Aust Orthod J; 2014 May; 30(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 24968645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Skeletal Class II treatment with Twin Force Bite Corrector: case reports.
Altuğ-Ataç AT; Dalcı ÖN; Memikoğlu UT
World J Orthod; 2008; 9(3):e7-17. PubMed ID: 19641763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Comparison of the effects of fixed and removable functional appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures.
Bilgiç F; Hamamci O; Başaran G
Aust Orthod J; 2011 Nov; 27(2):110-6. PubMed ID: 22372266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Efficacy of the Sander bite-jumping appliance in growing patients with mandibular retrusion: a randomized controlled trial.
Martina R; Cioffi I; Galeotti A; Tagliaferri R; Cimino R; Michelotti A; Valletta R; Farella M; Paduano S
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2013 May; 16(2):116-26. PubMed ID: 23323608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Prospective study of dentoskeletal changes in Class II division malocclusion treatment with twin force bite corrector.
Guimarães CH; Henriques JF; Janson G; de Almeida MR; Araki J; Cançado RH; Castro R; Nanda R
Angle Orthod; 2013 Mar; 83(2):319-26. PubMed ID: 22891750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparison of Twin Block, Andresen and removable appliances in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
Trenouth MJ
Funct Orthod; 1992; 9(4):26-31. PubMed ID: 1452055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes comparison between the Jasper Jumper and Twin Force Bite Corrector in Class II malocclusion patients: A retrospective study.
Pinelli Henriques Fontes F; Bastiani C; Bellini-Pereira SA; Aliaga-Del Castillo A; Castanha Henriques JF; Janson G
Int Orthod; 2020 Jun; 18(2):286-296. PubMed ID: 32063473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Dentaoalveolar changes in young adult patients with class II/1 malocclusion treated with the herbst appliance and an activator].
Nedeljković N; Sćepan I; Glisić B; Marković E
Vojnosanit Pregl; 2010 Feb; 67(2):170-5. PubMed ID: 20337101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and the activator-headgear combination appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment.
Lima KJ; Henriques JF; Janson G; Pereira SC; Neves LS; Cançado RH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 May; 143(5):684-94. PubMed ID: 23631970
[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. A comparison of the Herbst and Fränkel appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion.
McNamara JA; Howe RP; Dischinger TG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1990 Aug; 98(2):134-44. PubMed ID: 2378319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Effect of Twin-block appliance in the treatment of Class II and division I malocclusion: a cephalometric study in 12 patients].
Luo Y; Fang G
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2005 Feb; 14(1):90-3. PubMed ID: 15747025
[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. Treatment timing for functional jaw orthopaedics followed by fixed appliances: a controlled long-term study.
Pavoni C; Lombardo EC; Lione R; Faltin K; McNamara JA; Cozza P; Franchi L
Eur J Orthod; 2018 Jul; 40(4):430-436. PubMed ID: 29099926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A Pilot Study on the Dentoalveolar and Skeletal Effects of Two Functional Appliances in Class II, Division 1 Growing Children.
Chen H; Yagi K; Almeida FR; Pliska BT; Lowe AA
Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2015; 26(2):15-20. PubMed ID: 26349284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Correction of a Overjet and Overbite In Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Using Twin Block Appliance Therapy: A Case Report.
Shastri D; Tandon P; Singh GK; Singh A; Sharma S
Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2015; 26(4):19-22. PubMed ID: 27029087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Long-term stability of dentoalveolar and skeletal changes after activator-headgear treatment.
Lerstøl M; Torget O; Vandevska-Radunovic V
Eur J Orthod; 2010 Feb; 32(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 19477971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
