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.
208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36881158)
1. Comparison of the quality of life changes of patients receiving sagittal split ramus osteotomy or intraoral vertical subsigmoid osteotomy for mandibular prognathism. Wong NSM; Leung YY Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Apr; 27(4):1435-1448. PubMed ID: 36881158 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Postoperative stability of two common ramus osteotomy procedures for the correction of mandibular prognathism: A randomized controlled trial. Li DTS; Wang R; Wong NSM; Leung YY J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2022 Jan; 50(1):32-39. PubMed ID: 34627665 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Surgical morbidities of sagittal split ramus osteotomy versus intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy for the correction of mandibular prognathism: a randomized clinical trial. Leung YY; Wang R; Wong NSM; Li DTS; Au SW; Choi WS; Su YX Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2021 Jul; 50(7):933-939. PubMed ID: 33168369 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparisons of Jaw Line and Face Line after Mandibular Setback: Intraoral Vertical Ramus versus Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomies. Chen CM; Tseng YC; Ko EC; Chen MY; Chen KJ; Cheng JH Biomed Res Int; 2018; 2018():1375085. PubMed ID: 30662900 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Retrospective study of changes in the sensitivity of the oral mucosa: sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) versus intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO). Hasegawa T; Tateishi C; Asai M; Imai Y; Okamoto N; Shioyasono A; Kimoto A; Akashi M; Suzuki H; Furudoi S; Komori T Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2015 Mar; 44(3):349-55. PubMed ID: 25468631 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The different effects of intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) and sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) on mandibular border movement. Komori H; Kawanabe N; Kataoka T; Kato Y; Fujisawa A; Yamashiro T; Kamioka H Cranio; 2018 Jul; 36(4):228-233. PubMed ID: 28436308 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Stability of pre-orthodontic orthognathic surgery depending on mandibular surgical techniques: SSRO vs IVRO. Choi SH; Yoo HJ; Lee JY; Jung YS; Choi JW; Lee KJ J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2016 Sep; 44(9):1209-15. PubMed ID: 27524382 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of osseous healing after sagittal split ramus osteotomy and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. Rokutanda S; Yamada S; Yanamoto S; Omori K; Fujimura Y; Morita Y; Rokutanda H; Kohara H; Fujishita A; Nakamura T; Yoshimi T; Yoshida N; Umeda M Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2018 Oct; 47(10):1316-1321. PubMed ID: 29843949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of the skeletal stability after mandibular counter-clockwise rotation in three surgical procedures. Narahara S; Morita Y; Shido R; Yoshida N; Ohba S Odontology; 2024 Apr; 112(2):640-646. PubMed ID: 37880466 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Transverse and sagittal angulations of proximal segment after sagittal split and vertical ramus osteotomies and their influence on the stability of distal segment. Pan JH; Lee JJ; Lin HY; Chen YJ; Jane Yao CC; Kok SH J Formos Med Assoc; 2013 May; 112(5):244-52. PubMed ID: 23660219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Two-thirds anteroposterior ramus length is the preferred osteotomy point for intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. Chen CM; Hsu HJ; Liang SW; Chen PH; Hsu KJ; Tseng YC Clin Oral Investig; 2022 Feb; 26(2):1229-1239. PubMed ID: 34327588 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does mandibular osteotomy affect gonial angle in patients with class III deformity? Vertical ramus osteotomy versus sagittal split osteotomy. Tabrizi R; Pakshir H; Behnia H; Akhlaghi S; Shahsavari N Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2016 Aug; 45(8):992-6. PubMed ID: 27012604 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of different treatment procedures on the temporomandibular joint after mandibular setback in skeletal class III - A retrospective study. Ohba S; Tominaga J; Shido R; Koga T; Yamamoto H; Zaiima H; Yoshida N; Asahina I J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2022 Sep; 50(9):712-718. PubMed ID: 35987801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Change in condylar long axis and skeletal stability following sagittal split ramus osteotomy and intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy for mandibular prognathia. Ueki K; Marukawa K; Shimada M; Nakagawa K; Yamamoto E J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2005 Oct; 63(10):1494-9. PubMed ID: 16182918 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Three-dimensional analysis of mandible ramus morphology and transverse stability after intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy. Huang L; Tang S; Yan J; Liu Y; Piao Z Surg Radiol Anat; 2022 Apr; 44(4):551-558. PubMed ID: 35303119 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Postoperative stability of bimaxillary surgery in Class III patients with mandibular protrusion and mandibular deviation: a frontal cephalometric study. Al-Gunaid T; Yamada K; Takagi R; Saito C; Saito I Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2008 Nov; 37(11):992-8. PubMed ID: 18621507 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Transitional joint effusion in the mandibular prognathic surgery patient: intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy versus sagittal split ramus osteotomy. Nishimura M; Segami N; Sato J; Honjou M; Fujimura K J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2004 May; 62(5):545-8. PubMed ID: 15122556 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Condylar and temporomandibular joint disc positions after mandibular osteotomy for prognathism. Ueki K; Marukawa K; Nakagawa K; Yamamoto E J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2002 Dec; 60(12):1424-32; discussion 1432-4. PubMed ID: 12465004 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]