356 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26672713)
1. Effectiveness and efficiency of a CAD/CAM orthodontic bracket system.
Brown MW; Koroluk L; Ko CC; Zhang K; Chen M; Nguyen T
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Dec; 148(6):1067-74. PubMed ID: 26672713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical effects with customized brackets and CAD/CAM technology: a prospective controlled study.
Hegele J; Seitz L; Claussen C; Baumert U; Sabbagh H; Wichelhaus A
Prog Orthod; 2021 Dec; 22(1):40. PubMed ID: 34866163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of effectiveness and efficiency of fixed orthodontic treatment comparing standard and computer-aided design and manufacturing conventional bracket systems using indirect bonding for both: A retrospective study.
Palone M; Bizzocchi C; Guiducci D; Cremonini F; Pellitteri F; Spedicato GA; Verducci A; Lombardo L
J World Fed Orthod; 2023 Dec; 12(6):251-259. PubMed ID: 37735031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Efficacy of CAD/CAM Technology in Interventions Implemented in Orthodontics: A Scoping Review of Clinical Trials.
Ardila CM; Elorza-Durán A; Arrubla-Escobar D
Biomed Res Int; 2022; 2022():5310555. PubMed ID: 35692590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of white spot lesion formation between a self-ligating bracket and a conventional preadjusted straight wire bracket.
Polat Ö; Gökçelik A; Arman A; Arhun N
World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):e46-50. PubMed ID: 19641768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Standard vs computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing customized self-ligating systems using indirect bonding with both.
Jackers N; Maes N; Lambert F; Albert A; Charavet C
Angle Orthod; 2021 Jan; 91(1):74-80. PubMed ID: 33289798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of bracket bonding between two CAD/CAM guided bonding devices: GBD-U vs GBD-B.
Wang P; Li W; Li B; Han X; Bai D; Xue C
J Dent; 2023 Apr; 131():104456. PubMed ID: 36849067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy evaluation of bracket repositioning by indirect bonding: hard acrylic CAD/CAM versus soft one-layer silicone trays, an in vitro study.
Pottier T; Brient A; Turpin YL; Chauvel B; Meuric V; Sorel O; Brezulier D
Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Nov; 24(11):3889-3897. PubMed ID: 32236724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Accuracy of positioning three types of self-ligating brackets compared with a conventionally ligating bracket.
Birdsall J; Hunt NP; Sabbah W; Moseley HC
J Orthod; 2012 Mar; 39(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 22433325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effects of offset design on the accuracy of bracket placement with a guided bonding device.
Li B; Wang P; Xu H; Gu R; Han X; Bai D; Xue C
J Orofac Orthop; 2024 Jul; 85(4):250-259. PubMed ID: 36102945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Individualized orthodontic treatment: The Insignia system.
Gracco A; Stellini E; Parenti SI; Bonetti GA
Orthodontics (Chic.); 2013; 14(1):e88-94. PubMed ID: 23646343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reproducibility of bracket positioning in the indirect bonding technique.
Nichols DA; Gardner G; Carballeyra AD
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Nov; 144(5):770-6. PubMed ID: 24182593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessment of computer customized brackets and positioning jigs.
Dewhurst R
Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012; 23(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 22533029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Customized brackets and archwires for lingual orthodontic treatment.
Wiechmann D; Rummel V; Thalheim A; Simon JS; Wiechmann L
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Nov; 124(5):593-9. PubMed ID: 14614428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Conventional and self-ligating lingual orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class I nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.
Sezici YL; Önçağ MG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2023 Apr; 163(4):e106-e114. PubMed ID: 36737396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Fully-customized lingual appliances: how lingual orthodontics became a viable treatment option.
George RD; Hirani S
J Orthod; 2013 Sep; 40 Suppl 1():S8-13. PubMed ID: 24005954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Elastomeric-ligated vs self-ligating appliances: a pilot study examining microbial colonization and white spot lesion formation after 1 year of orthodontic treatment.
Buck T; Pellegrini P; Sauerwein R; Leo MC; Covell DA; Maier T; Machida CA
Orthodontics (Chic.); 2011; 12(2):108-21. PubMed ID: 21935504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Forces exerted by conventional and self-ligating brackets during simulated first- and second-order corrections.
Pandis N; Eliades T; Partowi S; Bourauel C
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 May; 133(5):738-42. PubMed ID: 18456148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 3D printed indirect bonding trays: Transfer accuracy of hard versus soft resin material in a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical study.
Schwärzler A; Nemec M; Lettner S; Rank C; Schedle A; Jonke E
Dent Mater; 2023 Nov; 39(11):1058-1065. PubMed ID: 37806794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Treatment efficiency of conventional vs self-ligating brackets: effects of archwire size and material.
Turnbull NR; Birnie DJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Mar; 131(3):395-9. PubMed ID: 17346597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
