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 *

246 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3464190)

  • 1. A cephalometric appraisal of nonextraction Begg treatment of Class II malocclusions.
    Meistrell ME; Cangialosi TJ; Lopez JE; Cabral-Angeles A
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1986 Oct; 90(4):286-95. PubMed ID: 3464190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A cephalometric appraisal of edgewise Class II nonextraction treatment with extraoral force.
    Cangialosi TJ; Meistrell ME; Leung MA; Ko JY
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 Apr; 93(4):315-24. PubMed ID: 3162641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to Class II correction in activator treatment.
    Pancherz H
    Am J Orthod; 1984 Feb; 85(2):125-34. PubMed ID: 6594053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study.
    Marure PS; Patil RU; Reddy S; Prakash A; Kshetrimayum N; Shukla R
    J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2016; 34(4):331-40. PubMed ID: 27681396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A cephalometric study to compare the effects of cervical traction and Andresen therapy in the treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion. Part 2--Dentoalveolar changes.
    Derringer K
    Br J Orthod; 1990 May; 17(2):89-99. PubMed ID: 2357464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The effect of two contrasting forms of orthodontic treatment on the facial profile.
    Looi LK; Mills JR
    Am J Orthod; 1986 Jun; 89(6):507-17. PubMed ID: 3459364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of timing on the outcomes of 1-phase nonextraction therapy of Class II malocclusion.
    Baccetti T; Franchi L; Kim LH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Oct; 136(4):501-9. PubMed ID: 19815151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Response to activator treatment in Class II malocclusions.
    Vargervik K; Harvold EP
    Am J Orthod; 1985 Sep; 88(3):242-51. PubMed ID: 3862347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Influence of the cephalometric characteristics on the occlusal success rate of Class II malocclusions treated with nonextraction or with two maxillary premolar extraction protocols.
    Janson G; Simão TM; Barros SE; Janson M; de Freitas MR
    World J Orthod; 2010; 11(4):e63-71. PubMed ID: 21490991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Skeletal and dental changes following functional regulator therapy on class II patients.
    McNamara JA; Bookstein FL; Shaughnessy TG
    Am J Orthod; 1985 Aug; 88(2):91-110. PubMed ID: 3861103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cephalometric comparison of maxillary second molar extraction and nonextraction treatments in patients with Class II malocclusions.
    Waters D; Harris EF
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 Dec; 120(6):608-13; quiz 677. PubMed ID: 11742305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of Class II treatment changes noted with the light wire, edgewise, and Fränkel appliances.
    Gianelly AA; Arena SA; Bernstein L
    Am J Orthod; 1984 Oct; 86(4):269-76. PubMed ID: 6592975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of treatment with the Bass appliance on skeletal Class II malocclusions: a cephalometric investigation.
    Cura N; Saraç M
    Eur J Orthod; 1997 Dec; 19(6):691-702. PubMed ID: 9458602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Maxillary traction splint: a cephalometric evaluation.
    Caldwell SF; Hymas TA; Timm TA
    Am J Orthod; 1984 May; 85(5):376-84. PubMed ID: 6586076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Long-term stability of Angle Class II, division 1 malocclusions with successful occlusal results at end of active treatment.
    Fidler BC; Artun J; Joondeph DR; Little RM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1995 Mar; 107(3):276-85. PubMed ID: 7879760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation.
    Pancherz H
    Am J Orthod; 1979 Oct; 76(4):423-42. PubMed ID: 291343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Treatment of Class II malocclusions with removable appliances. Part 4. Class II division 2 treatment.
    Rock WP
    Br Dent J; 1990 Apr; 168(7):298-302. PubMed ID: 2334603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.