219 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30973636)
1. Evaluation of the relationship between stylohyoid complex morphology and maxillary/mandibular position using cone beam computed tomography.
Yılmaz D; Orhan K; Cesur E
Folia Morphol (Warsz); 2020; 79(1):148-155. PubMed ID: 30973636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Evaluation of stylohyoid complex in subjects with different types of malocclusions using cone-beam computed tomography: a retrospective study in a Turkish subpopulation.
Kalabalık F; Şahin O
Surg Radiol Anat; 2020 Sep; 42(9):1095-1100. PubMed ID: 32394117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Morphologic quantification of the maxilla and the mandible with cone-beam computed tomography.
Deguchi T; Katashiba S; Inami T; Foong KW; Huak CY
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Feb; 137(2):218-22. PubMed ID: 20152678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Analysis of the discrepancy of crown-root morphology of central incisors among different skeletal malocclusion using cone-beam CT].
Wang XM; Wang J; Zou M; Zheng J; Xue H
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Feb; 54(2):101-106. PubMed ID: 30695911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Three-dimensional evaluation of dentofacial transverse widths in adults with different sagittal facial patterns.
Hwang S; Song J; Lee J; Choi YJ; Chung CJ; Kim KH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Sep; 154(3):365-374. PubMed ID: 30173839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Three-dimensional evaluation of labial alveolar bone overlying the maxillary and mandibular incisors in different skeletal classifications of malocclusion.
Raber A; Kula K; Ghoneima A
Int Orthod; 2019 Jun; 17(2):287-295. PubMed ID: 31015017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of mandibular volume classified by vertical skeletal dimensions with cone-beam computed tomography.
Nakawaki T; Yamaguchi T; Tomita D; Hikita Y; Adel M; Katayama K; Maki K
Angle Orthod; 2016 Nov; 86(6):949-954. PubMed ID: 27007754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Preliminary comparison of three-dimensional reconstructed palatal morphology in subjects with different sagittal and vertical patterns.
Huang X; Hu X; Zhao Y; Wang Y; Gu Y
BMC Oral Health; 2020 Feb; 20(1):55. PubMed ID: 32066451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Quantitative analysis of the maxilla and the mandible in hyper- and hypodivergent skeletal Class II pattern.
Nair R; Deguchi TS; Li X; Katashiba S; Chan YH
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2009 Feb; 12(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 19154269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The crown-root morphology of central incisors in different skeletal malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.
Wang XM; Ma LZ; Wang J; Xue H
Prog Orthod; 2019 May; 20(1):20. PubMed ID: 31111270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Correlation between midline deviation and condylar position in patients with Class II malocclusion: A cone-beam computed tomography evaluation.
Roque-Torres GD; Peyneau PD; Dantas da Costa E; Bóscolo FN; Maria de Almeida S; Ribeiro LW
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Jul; 154(1):99-107. PubMed ID: 29957328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of anterior mandibular alveolar thickness and height in young adults with different sagittal and vertical skeletal relationships: A CBCT Study.
Casanova-Sarmiento JA; Arriola-Guillén LE; Ruíz-Mora GA; Rodríguez-Cárdenas YA; Aliaga-Del Castillo A
Int Orthod; 2020 Mar; 18(1):79-88. PubMed ID: 31735681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Influence of conventional and skeletal anchorage system supported fixed functional appliance on maxillo-mandibular complex and temporomandibular joint: A preliminary comparative cone beam computed tomography study.
Gandedkar NH; Shrikantaiah S; Patil AK; Baseer MA; Chng CK; Ganeshkar SV; Kambalyal P
Int Orthod; 2019 Jun; 17(2):256-268. PubMed ID: 31023589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
