463 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27871255)
1. Root resorption during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating or conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Yi J; Li M; Li Y; Li X; Zhao Z
BMC Oral Health; 2016 Nov; 16(1):125. PubMed ID: 27871255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. External apical root resorption in patients treated with conventional and self-ligating brackets.
Pandis N; Nasika M; Polychronopoulou A; Eliades T
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):646-51. PubMed ID: 18984396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Comparative study on the apical root resorption between self-ligating and conventional brackets in extraction patients].
Liu XQ; Sun XL; Yang Q; Fan CH; Chen XJ
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2012 Aug; 21(4):460-5. PubMed ID: 23135126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The influence of bracket type on the external apical root resorption in class I extraction patients - a retrospective study.
Qin F; Zhou Y
BMC Oral Health; 2019 Mar; 19(1):53. PubMed ID: 30922294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Root resorption due to orthodontic treatment using self-ligating and conventional brackets : A cone-beam computed tomography study.
Aras I; Unal I; Huniler G; Aras A
J Orofac Orthop; 2018 May; 79(3):181-190. PubMed ID: 29651519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Root resorption of self-ligating and conventional preadjusted brackets in severe anterior crowding Class I patients: a longitudinal retrospective study.
Chen W; Haq AA; Zhou Y
BMC Oral Health; 2015 Oct; 15():115. PubMed ID: 26427531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Comparison of root resorption between self-ligating and conventional brackets using cone-beam CT].
Liu Y; Guo HM
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2016 Apr; 25(2):238-41. PubMed ID: 27329894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. External root resorption with the self-ligating Damon system-a retrospective study.
Handem RH; Janson G; Matias M; de Freitas KM; de Lima DV; Garib DG; de Freitas MR
Prog Orthod; 2016 Dec; 17(1):20. PubMed ID: 27365168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The influence of bracket torque on external apical root resorption in bimaxillary protrusion patients: a retrospective study.
Zhang X; Zhou H; Liao X; Liu Y
BMC Oral Health; 2022 Jan; 22(1):7. PubMed ID: 35012521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Is there any difference between conventional, passive and active self-ligating brackets? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Maizeray R; Wagner D; Lefebvre F; Lévy-Bénichou H; Bolender Y
Int Orthod; 2021 Dec; 19(4):523-538. PubMed ID: 34629309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: a single-center randomized controlled trial.
Songra G; Clover M; Atack NE; Ewings P; Sherriff M; Sandy JR; Ireland AJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 May; 145(5):569-78. PubMed ID: 24785921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparative assessment of the forces and moments generated at the maxillary incisors between conventional and self-ligating brackets using a reverse curve of Spee NiTi archwire.
Sifakakis I; Pandis N; Makou M; Eliades T; Bourauel C
Aust Orthod J; 2010 Nov; 26(2):127-33. PubMed ID: 21175021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Microbial colonisation associated with conventional and self-ligating brackets: a systematic review.
Parmar NP; Thompson GL; Atack NE; Ireland AJ; Sherriff M; Haworth JA
J Orthod; 2022 Jun; 49(2):151-162. PubMed ID: 34839734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Alignment efficiency of Damon3 self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems: a randomized clinical trial.
Scott P; DiBiase AT; Sherriff M; Cobourne MT
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Oct; 134(4):470.e1-8. PubMed ID: 18929262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of root resorption between self-ligating and conventional preadjusted brackets using cone beam computed tomography.
Leite V; Conti AC; Navarro R; Almeida M; Oltramari-Navarro P; Almeida R
Angle Orthod; 2012 Nov; 82(6):1078-82. PubMed ID: 22409394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mandibular dental arch changes associated with treatment of crowding using self-ligating and conventional brackets.
Pandis N; Polychronopoulou A; Makou M; Eliades T
Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):248-53. PubMed ID: 19959610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Root resorption, treatment time and extraction rate during orthodontic treatment with self-ligating and conventional brackets.
Jacobs C; Gebhardt PF; Jacobs V; Hechtner M; Meila D; Wehrbein H
Head Face Med; 2014 Jan; 10():2. PubMed ID: 24456620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of maxillary arch dimensional and inclination changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets using broad archwires.
Atik E; Akarsu-Guven B; Kocadereli I; Ciger S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Jun; 149(6):830-7. PubMed ID: 27241993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Torque expression of self-ligating brackets.
Badawi HM; Toogood RW; Carey JP; Heo G; Major PW
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 May; 133(5):721-8. PubMed ID: 18456146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An in vitro study into the efficacy of complex tooth alignment with conventional and self-ligating brackets.
Montasser MA; Keilig L; Bourauel C
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2015 Feb; 18(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 25264808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
