161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34255093)
1. Floating norms for individualising the ANB angle and the WITS appraisal in orthodontic cephalometric analysis based on guiding variables.
Paddenberg E; Proff P; Kirschneck C
J Orofac Orthop; 2023 Jan; 84(1):10-18. PubMed ID: 34255093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Correlation of Dental and Skeletal Malocclusions in Sagittal Plane among Saudi Orthodontic Patients.
Al-Hamlan N; Al-Eissa B; Al-Hiyasat AS; Albalawi FS; Ahmed AE
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2015 May; 16(5):353-9. PubMed ID: 26162253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cephalometric Floating Norms for the
Perinetti G; Ceschi M; Scalia A; Contardo L
Biomed Res Int; 2018; 2018():8740731. PubMed ID: 29850584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Accuracy of different cephalometric analyses in the diagnosis of class III malocclusion in Saudi and Yemeni population.
Alassiry AM
J Orthod Sci; 2020; 9():14. PubMed ID: 33354540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The wits appraisal using three reference planes and its interaction with the ANB angle among a sub-set of Nigerians".
Ifesanya JU; Adeyemi AT; Otuyemi OD
Afr J Med Med Sci; 2014 Sep; 43(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 26223140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Diagnostic validity of different cephalometric analyses for assessment of the sagittal skeletal pattern.
Ahmed M; Shaikh A; Fida M
Dental Press J Orthod; 2018; 23(5):75-81. PubMed ID: 30427496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison between cephalometric classification methods for sagittal jaw relationships.
Hurmerinta K; Rahkamo A; Haavikko K
Eur J Oral Sci; 1997 Jun; 105(3):221-7. PubMed ID: 9249188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Predicting the sagittal skeletal pattern using dental cast and facial profile photographs in children aged 9 to 14 years.
Sukhia RH; Nuruddin R; Azam SI; Fida M
J Pak Med Assoc; 2022 Nov; 72(11):2198-2203. PubMed ID: 37013286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of Gender Dimorphism on Sagittal Cephalometry in Pakistani Population.
Qamruddin I; Alam MK; Shahid F; Tanveer S; Mukhtiar M; Asim Z
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2016 May; 26(5):390-3. PubMed ID: 27225144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Relation of the Wits appraisal to the ANB angle: a statistical appraisal.
Järvinen S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 Nov; 94(5):432-5. PubMed ID: 3189246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A randomized clinical trial to assess the sagittal effects of Transforce transverse appliance (TTA) and NiTi palatal expander (NPE) on skeletal class II malocclusion in growing patients during retention phase - A cephalometric study using a historical control group.
Nagrik AP; Bhad WA; Chavan SJ; Doshi UH
Int Orthod; 2020 Dec; 18(4):722-731. PubMed ID: 33020047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The use of linear and angular measurements of maxillo-mandibular anteroposterior discrepancies.
Ferrario VF; Sforza C; Miani A; Tartaglia GM
Clin Orthod Res; 1999 Feb; 2(1):34-41. PubMed ID: 10534977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Properties of the ANB angle and the Wits appraisal in the skeletal estimation of Angle's Class III patients.
Iwasaki H; Ishikawa H; Chowdhury L; Nakamura S; Iida J
Eur J Orthod; 2002 Oct; 24(5):477-83. PubMed ID: 12407943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative assessment of sagittal skeletal discrepancy: a cephalometric study.
Aparna P; Kumar DN; Prasad M; Shamnur N; G AK; K R S; B R GK; Gupta N
J Clin Diagn Res; 2015 Apr; 9(4):ZC38-41. PubMed ID: 26023641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Overjet as a predictor of sagittal skeletal relationships.
Zupancic S; Pohar M; Farcnik F; Ovsenik M
Eur J Orthod; 2008 Jun; 30(3):269-73. PubMed ID: 18540015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessment and predictability of ANB angle.
Chandra PK; Godfrey K
Aust Orthod J; 1990 Mar; 11(3):173-7. PubMed ID: 2152434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Floating norms for the ANB angle as guidance for clinical considerations.
Järvinen S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1986 Nov; 90(5):383-7. PubMed ID: 3465233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Study between anb angle and Wits appraisal in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Zamora N; Cibrián R; Gandia JL; Paredes V
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2013 Jul; 18(4):e725-32. PubMed ID: 23722136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB.
Hussels W; Nanda RS
Am J Orthod; 1984 May; 85(5):411-23. PubMed ID: 6586080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A cross-sectional analysis of Wits and Riedel in adults with skeletal III malocclusion: How informative are they?
Oliver GR; Grimes K; Pandis N; Fleming PS
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2018 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 29624856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
