228 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30173841)
1. Mandibular condyle bone density in adolescents with varying skeletal patterns evaluated using cone-beam computed tomography: A potential predictive tool.
Kim KJ; Park JH; Bay RC; Lee MY; Chang NY; Chae JM
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Sep; 154(3):382-389. PubMed ID: 30173841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Cone-beam CT evaluation of temporomandibular joint in skeletal class Ⅱ female adolescents with different vertical patterns].
Zhou J; Liu Y
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2020 Dec; 53(1):109-119. PubMed ID: 33550344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of condylar size among different anteroposterior and vertical skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography.
Hasebe A; Yamaguchi T; Nakawaki T; Hikita Y; Katayama K; Maki K
Angle Orthod; 2019 Mar; 89(2):306-311. PubMed ID: 30475648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Spatial analysis of condyle position according to sagittal skeletal relationship, assessed by cone beam computed tomography.
Arieta-Miranda JM; Silva-Valencia M; Flores-Mir C; Paredes-Sampen NA; Arriola-Guillen LE
Prog Orthod; 2013 Oct; 14():36. PubMed ID: 24325842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of masseter muscle morphology in different types of malocclusions using cone beam computed tomography.
Becht MP; Mah J; Martin C; Razmus T; Gunel E; Ngan P
Int Orthod; 2014 Mar; 12(1):32-48. PubMed ID: 24456631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of condyle-fossa relationships in adolescents with various skeletal patterns using cone-beam computed tomography.
Chae JM; Park JH; Tai K; Mizutani K; Uzuka S; Miyashita W; Seo HY
Angle Orthod; 2020 Mar; 90(2):224-232. PubMed ID: 31638857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Mandibular ramus height and condyle distance asymmetries in individuals with different facial growth patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study.
Lemes CR; Tozzi CF; Gribel S; Gribel BF; Venezian GC; do Carmo Menezes C; Custodio W
Surg Radiol Anat; 2021 Feb; 43(2):267-274. PubMed ID: 32965519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Three-dimensional mandibular characteristics in skeletal malocclusion : A cross-sectional study.
Olbrisch C; Santander P; Moser N; Klenke D; Meyer-Marcotty P; Quast A
J Orofac Orthop; 2024 Mar; 85(2):134-145. PubMed ID: 36018344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Relationship between occlusal force and mandibular condyle morphology. Evaluated by limited cone-beam computed tomography.
Kurusu A; Horiuchi M; Soma K
Angle Orthod; 2009 Nov; 79(6):1063-9. PubMed ID: 19852595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Basal and dentoalveolar transverse parameters in different sagittal and vertical malocclusions in adults: a comparative study.
Abdulghani EA; Al-Sosowa AA; Alhashimi N; Cao B; Zheng W; Li Y; Alhammadi MS
Clin Oral Investig; 2024 Apr; 28(5):276. PubMed ID: 38668916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comprehensive three-dimensional positional and morphological assessment of the temporomandibular joint in skeletal Class II patients with mandibular retrognathism in different vertical skeletal patterns.
Al-Hadad SA; ALyafrusee ES; Abdulqader AA; Al-Gumaei WS; Al-Mohana RAAM; Ren L
BMC Oral Health; 2022 Apr; 22(1):149. PubMed ID: 35484618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of Size of the Condyle in Vertical and Anteroposterior Skeletal Conditions with the Help of Cone-beam Computed Tomography.
Jyotirmay ; Singh SK; Adarsh K; Sinha A; Kumar A; Sharan S
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Feb; 22(2):189-193. PubMed ID: 34257181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessment of Facial Soft Tissue Dimensions in Adult Patients with Different Sagittal Skeletal Classes using Cone beam Computed Tomography.
Jazmati HM; Ajaj MA; Hajeer MY
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2016 Jul; 17(7):542-8. PubMed ID: 27595719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluating mandibular symphysis bone density according to various skeletal patterns with CBCT.
Gousman J; Park JH; Chae JM
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2021 Feb; 24(1):70-77. PubMed ID: 32599658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Evaluation of condylar asymmetry in different skeletal patterns with cone-beam CT].
Li WY; Chen WJ; Hou W; Qin JW; Duan YF; Mu JQ
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2019 Oct; 28(5):523-528. PubMed ID: 32274486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of condylar cortical bone thickness in patient groups with different vertical facial dimensions using cone-beam computed tomography.
Lo Giudice A; Rustico L; Caprioglio A; Migliorati M; Nucera R
Odontology; 2020 Oct; 108(4):669-675. PubMed ID: 32236830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mandibular dimensions of subjects with asymmetric skeletal class III malocclusion and normal occlusion compared with cone-beam computed tomography.
Lee H; Bayome M; Kim SH; Kim KB; Behrents RG; Kook YA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Aug; 142(2):179-85. PubMed ID: 22858326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Linear and Volumetric Mandibular Asymmetries in Adult Patients With Different Skeletal Classes and Vertical Patterns: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study.
Mendoza LV; Bellot-Arcís C; Montiel-Company JM; García-Sanz V; Almerich-Silla JM; Paredes-Gallardo V
Sci Rep; 2018 Aug; 8(1):12319. PubMed ID: 30120301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Björk-Jarabak cephalometric analysis on CBCT synthesized cephalograms with different dentofacial sagittal skeletal patterns.
Rodriguez-Cardenas YA; Arriola-Guillen LE; Flores-Mir C
Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(6):46-53. PubMed ID: 25628079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Temporomandibular condylar morphology in diverse maxillary-mandibular skeletal patterns: A 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography study.
Ma Q; Bimal P; Mei L; Olliver S; Farella M; Li H
J Am Dent Assoc; 2018 Jul; 149(7):589-598. PubMed ID: 29655707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
