228 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29016191)
1. Treatment changes of hypo- and hyperdivergent Class II Herbst patients.
Rogers K; Campbell PM; Tadlock L; Schneiderman E; Buschang PH
Angle Orthod; 2018 Jan; 88(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 29016191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Effects of fixed functional orthodontic treatment in hypodivergent and hyperdivergent class II patients-a retrospective cephalometric investigation.
Hourfar J; Kinzinger GSM; Frye L; Lisson JA
Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Aug; 27(8):4773-4784. PubMed ID: 37351654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dental and skeletal effects after total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate on hypo- and hyperdivergent Class II malocclusions in adolescents.
Jung CY; Park JH; Ku JH; Lee NK; Kim Y; Kook YA
Angle Orthod; 2021 Jan; 91(1):22-29. PubMed ID: 33339047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Temporomandibular joint growth changes in hyperdivergent and hypodivergent Herbst subjects. A long-term roentgenographic cephalometric study.
Pancherz H; Michailidou C
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Aug; 126(2):153-61; quiz 254-5. PubMed ID: 15316469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Maxillary molar distalization or mandibular enhancement: a cephalometric comparison of comprehensive orthodontic treatment including the pendulum and the Herbst appliances.
Burkhardt DR; McNamara JA; Baccetti T
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Feb; 123(2):108-16. PubMed ID: 12594414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation.
VanLaecken R; Martin CA; Dischinger T; Razmus T; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):582-93. PubMed ID: 17110255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty.
Baccetti T; Franchi L; Stahl F
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jun; 135(6):698.e1-10; discussion 698-9. PubMed ID: 19524823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cephalometric study of Class II Division 1 patients treated with an extended-duration, reinforced, banded Herbst appliance followed by fixed appliances.
Tomblyn T; Rogers M; Andrews L; Martin C; Tremont T; Gunel E; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Nov; 150(5):818-830. PubMed ID: 27871709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of Herbst appliance treatment on the mandibular plane angle: a cephalometric roentgenographic study.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1996 Aug; 110(2):225-9. PubMed ID: 8760851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effect of zigzag elastics in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion subjects with hypo- and hyperdivergent growth patterns. A pilot study.
Aras A; Cinsar A; Bulut H
Eur J Orthod; 2001 Aug; 23(4):393-402. PubMed ID: 11544789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effect of cervical headgear on patients with high or low mandibular plane angles and the "myth" of posterior mandibular rotation.
Haralabakis NB; Sifakakis IB
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Sep; 126(3):310-7. PubMed ID: 15356494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The mechanism of Class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: a cephalometric roentgenographic study.
Ruf S; Pancherz H
Angle Orthod; 1997; 67(4):271-6. PubMed ID: 9267575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A cephalometric comparison of treatment with the Twin-block and stainless steel crown Herbst appliances followed by fixed appliance therapy.
Schaefer AT; McNamara JA; Franchi L; Baccetti T
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Jul; 126(1):7-15. PubMed ID: 15224053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Outcome differences after orthodontic camouflage treatment in hypo- and hyperdivergent patients - A retrospective cephalometric investigation.
Hourfar J; Kinzinger GSM; Frye L; Lisson JA
Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Dec; 27(12):7307-7318. PubMed ID: 37953326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A cephalometric and tomographic evaluation of Herbst treatment in the mixed dentition.
Croft RS; Buschang PH; English JD; Meyer R
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Oct; 116(4):435-43. PubMed ID: 10511673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Orthodontic treatment changes of chin position in Class II Division 1 patients.
LaHaye MB; Buschang PH; Alexander RG; Boley JC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Dec; 130(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 17169735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Soft tissue profile changes after Functional Mandibular Advancer or Herbst appliance treatment in class II patients.
Hourfar J; Lisson JA; Gross U; Frye L; Kinzinger GSM
Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Mar; 22(2):971-980. PubMed ID: 28721528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Retrospective comparison of dental and skeletal effects in the treatment of Class II malocclusion between Herbst and Xbow appliances.
Insabralde NM; Rodrigues de Almeida M; Rodrigues de Almeida-Pedrin R; Flores-Mir C; Castanha Henriques JF
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Oct; 160(4):544-551. PubMed ID: 34274201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Dentoskeletal effects of Twin Block and Herbst appliances in patients with Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy.
Baysal A; Uysal T
Eur J Orthod; 2014 Apr; 36(2):164-72. PubMed ID: 24663007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
