210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38409017)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Does mandibular advancement with clear aligners have the same skeletal and dentoalveolar effects as traditional functional appliances?
Wu Y; Yu Q; Xia Y; Wang B; Chen S; Gu K; Zhang B; Zhu M
BMC Oral Health; 2023 Feb; 23(1):65. PubMed ID: 36732724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Stability of Class II treatment with an edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition: Skeletal and dental changes.
Wigal TG; Dischinger T; Martin C; Razmus T; Gunel E; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Aug; 140(2):210-23. PubMed ID: 21803259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effectiveness of the Herbst appliance for patients with Class II malocclusion: a meta-analysis.
Yang X; Zhu Y; Long H; Zhou Y; Jian F; Ye N; Gao M; Lai W
Eur J Orthod; 2016 Jun; 38(3):324-33. PubMed ID: 26306822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparative Evaluation of Twin Block Appliance and Fixed Orthodontic Appliance in Early Class II Malocclusion Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Radwan ES; Maher A; Montasser MA
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2022 Nov; 23(11):1111-1121. PubMed ID: 37073934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Effects of modified twin block appliance in growing Class II high angle cases: A cephalometric study.
Jha K; Adhikari M
F1000Res; 2022; 11():459. PubMed ID: 38680231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation.
VanLaecken R; Martin CA; Dischinger T; Razmus T; Ngan P
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Nov; 130(5):582-93. PubMed ID: 17110255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Mandibular propulsion appliance for adults with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
González Espinosa D; Santos M; Mendes SMDA; Normando D
Eur J Orthod; 2020 Apr; 42(2):163-173. PubMed ID: 31786599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents.
Batista KB; Thiruvenkatachari B; Harrison JE; O'Brien KD
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Mar; 3(3):CD003452. PubMed ID: 29534303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children.
Owens D; Watkinson S; Harrison JE; Turner S; Worthington HV
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2024 Apr; 4(4):CD003451. PubMed ID: 38597341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. One phase or two phase orthodontic treatment for Class II division 1 malocclusion ?
Veitz-Keenan A; Liu N
Evid Based Dent; 2019 Sep; 20(3):72-73. PubMed ID: 31562403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The Herbst appliance combined with a completely customized lingual appliance: A retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.
Mujagic M; Pandis N; Fleming PS; Katsaros C
Int Orthod; 2020 Dec; 18(4):732-738. PubMed ID: 32839142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The skeletal and dental effects of Hanks Herbst versus twin block appliances for class II correction in growing patients: a randomized clinical trial.
Pacha MM; Fleming PS; Shagmani M; Johal A
Eur J Orthod; 2024 Jan; 46(1):. PubMed ID: 37930325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
