These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29059295)

  • 1. Treatment with facemask and removable upper appliance versus modified tandem traction bow appliance: the effects on mandibular space.
    Tortop T; Kaygisiz E; Erkun S; Yuksel S
    Eur J Orthod; 2018 Jul; 40(4):372-377. PubMed ID: 29059295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Modified tandem traction bow appliance compared with facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.
    Tortop T; Kaygisiz E; Gencer D; Yuksel S; Atalay Z
    Angle Orthod; 2014 Jul; 84(4):642-8. PubMed ID: 24274958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of double-plate appliance/facemask combination and facemask therapy in treating class III malocclusions.
    Gencer D; Kaygisiz E; Yüksel S; Tortop T
    Angle Orthod; 2015 Mar; 85(2):278-83. PubMed ID: 24913739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of double-plate appliance and facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.
    Ucem TT; Ucuncü N; Yüksel S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Dec; 126(6):672-9. PubMed ID: 15592214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of two maxillary protraction protocols: tooth-borne versus bone-anchored protraction facemask treatment.
    Ngan P; Wilmes B; Drescher D; Martin C; Weaver B; Gunel E
    Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():26. PubMed ID: 26303311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Early and late facemask therapy.
    Yüksel S; Uçem TT; Keykubat A
    Eur J Orthod; 2001 Oct; 23(5):559-68. PubMed ID: 11668875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Geometric morphometric analysis of the pharyngeal airway during treatment of Class III malocclusion.
    Kaygisiz E; Ocakoglu G; Kurnaz M; Yüksel S; Tortop T
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2022 Sep; 162(3):374-385. PubMed ID: 35537998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dentofacial effects of a modified tandem traction bow appliance.
    Atalay Z; Tortop T
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Dec; 32(6):655-61. PubMed ID: 20348164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dentoskeletal Effects of the Modified Tandem Appliance vs the Facemask Appliance in the Treatment of Skeletal Class III Malocclusion: A Single-center, Randomized Controlled Trial.
    Husson AH; Burhan AS; Salma FB; Nawaya FR
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Jul; 17(7):522-9. PubMed ID: 27595716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of modified and conventional facemask therapies with expansion on dynamic measurement of natural head position in Class III patients.
    Yagci A; Uysal T; Usumez S; Orhan M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Nov; 140(5):e223-31. PubMed ID: 22051500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Facemask therapy with and without expansion.
    Tortop T; Keykubat A; Yuksel S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):467-74. PubMed ID: 17920499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Skeletal and dental effects of a mini maxillary protraction appliance.
    Altug Z; Arslan AD
    Angle Orthod; 2006 May; 76(3):360-8. PubMed ID: 16637712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Treatment and posttreatment effects of a facial mask combined with a bite-block appliance in Class III malocclusion.
    Cozza P; Baccetti T; Mucedero M; Pavoni C; Franchi L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Sep; 138(3):300-10. PubMed ID: 20816299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dental changes and space gained as a result of early treatment of pseudo-Class III malocclusion.
    Gu Y; Rabie AB
    Aust Orthod J; 2000 Mar; 16(1):40-52. PubMed ID: 11201959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Molar distalization with a pendulum appliance K-loop combination.
    Acar AG; Gürsoy S; Dinçer M
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Aug; 32(4):459-65. PubMed ID: 20231213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
    Yao CC; Lai EH; Chang JZ; Chen I; Chen YJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):615-24. PubMed ID: 18984393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Craniofacial morphology of skeletal class III patients before treatment and growth-related changes during treatment with a maxillary protraction appliance: a comparison of orthodontic and surgical cases.
    Murakami C; Hiyama S; Ohyama K
    World J Orthod; 2005; 6(1):51-60. PubMed ID: 15794042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of facial mask/bite block therapy with or without rapid palatal expansion.
    Pavoni C; Mucedero M; Baccetti T; Franchi L; Polimeni A; Cozza P
    Prog Orthod; 2009; 10(1):20-8. PubMed ID: 19506743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dentofacial effects of skeletal anchored treatment modalities for the correction of maxillary retrognathia.
    Sar C; Sahinoğlu Z; Özçirpici AA; Uçkan S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jan; 145(1):41-54. PubMed ID: 24373654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Is bodily advancement of the lower incisors possible?
    Strahm C; De Sousa AP; Grobéty D; Mavropoulos A; Kiliaridis S
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):425-31. PubMed ID: 19395370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.