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.
161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36052579)
1. Comparative Evaluation of Soft Tissue Profile Changes with Herbst and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Malocclusion Patients: A Perception Study. Kannan A; Padmanabhan S Turk J Orthod; 2022 Sep; 35(3):173-179. PubMed ID: 36052579 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Esthetic perception of facial profile changes in Class II patients treated with Herbst or Forsus appliances. Moresca AHK; de Moraes ND; Topolski F; Flores-Mir C; Moro A; Moresca RC; Correr GM Angle Orthod; 2020 Jul; 90(4):571-577. PubMed ID: 33378491 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Rego MV; Martinez EF; Coelho RM; Leal LM; Thiesen G Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Mar; 151(3):559-564. PubMed ID: 28257740 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Twin Block appliance and Herbst appliance in the treatment of Class II malocclusion among children: a meta-analysis. Xu F; Fang Y; Sui X; Yao Y BMC Oral Health; 2024 Feb; 24(1):278. PubMed ID: 38409017 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Soft tissue effects of Twin Block and Herbst appliances in patients with Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy. Baysal A; Uysal T Eur J Orthod; 2013 Feb; 35(1):71-81. PubMed ID: 21357655 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial. O'Brien K; Wright J; Conboy F; Sanjie Y; Mandall N; Chadwick S; Connolly I; Cook P; Birnie D; Hammond M; Harradine N; Lewis D; McDade C; Mitchell L; Murray A; O'Neill J; Read M; Robinson S; Roberts-Harry D; Sandler J; Shaw I Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Aug; 124(2):128-37. PubMed ID: 12923506 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Comparative study of the clinical effects of three different functional appliances on the treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion]. Song Y; Yu YL; Shen H; Zhang J Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Aug; 26(4):406-8. PubMed ID: 18780501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of soft-tissue profiles after treatment with headgear or Herbst appliance. Sloss EA; Southard KA; Qian F; Stock SE; Mann KR; Meyer DL; Southard TE Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Apr; 133(4):509-14. PubMed ID: 18405814 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children. Thiruvenkatachari B; Harrison JE; Worthington HV; O'Brien KD Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2013 Nov; (11):CD003452. PubMed ID: 24226169 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A cephalometric comparison of treatment with the Twin-block and stainless steel crown Herbst appliances followed by fixed appliance therapy. Schaefer AT; McNamara JA; Franchi L; Baccetti T Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Jul; 126(1):7-15. PubMed ID: 15224053 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Soft tissue angle evaluation of fixed Twin-Block appliance treatment and tooth extraction treatment in skeletal Class II malocclusion]. Gong Y; Li PL; Wang HH; Yu Q; Wei B; Shen G Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2016 Feb; 25(1):82-6. PubMed ID: 27063315 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Facial-profile attractiveness changes in adult patients treated with the Herbst appliance. von Bremen J; Erbe C; Pancherz H; Ruf S J Orofac Orthop; 2014 May; 75(3):167-74. PubMed ID: 24825829 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Dentoskeletal effects of Twin Block and Herbst appliances in patients with Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy. Baysal A; Uysal T Eur J Orthod; 2014 Apr; 36(2):164-72. PubMed ID: 24663007 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Soft tissue profile changes after Functional Mandibular Advancer or Herbst appliance treatment in class II patients. Hourfar J; Lisson JA; Gross U; Frye L; Kinzinger GSM Clin Oral Investig; 2018 Mar; 22(2):971-980. PubMed ID: 28721528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and MARA functional appliances. Siara-Olds NJ; Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; Berger J; Bayirli B Angle Orthod; 2010 Jan; 80(1):18-29. PubMed ID: 19852635 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Changes in the craniofacial structures and esthetic perceptions of soft-tissue profile alterations after distalization and Herbst appliance treatment. Irezli EC; Baysal A Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Mar; 159(3):292-304. PubMed ID: 33487502 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Changes in soft tissue profile following the treatment using a Herbst appliance--a photographic analysis. Nedeljković N; Cubrilo D; Hadzi-Mihailović M Vojnosanit Pregl; 2014 Jan; 71(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 24516984 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Perceived facial changes of Class II Division 1 patients with convex profiles after functional orthopedic treatment followed by fixed orthodontic appliances. Tsiouli K; Topouzelis N; Papadopoulos MA; Gkantidis N Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Jul; 152(1):80-91. PubMed ID: 28651771 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]