158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38564121)
1. The current overview of the devices of temporary anchorage placed on the palatal bone: CBCT study.
Kotan S; Koç A; Öner Talmaç AG
Odontology; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38564121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of bone depth, cortical bone, and mucosa thickness of palatal posterior supra-alveolar insertion site for miniscrew placement.
Nucera R; Ciancio E; Maino G; Barbera S; Imbesi E; Bellocchio AM
Prog Orthod; 2022 Jun; 23(1):18. PubMed ID: 35661931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of mandibular cortical bone thickness for placement of temporary anchorage devices (TADs).
Kim JH; Park YC
Korean J Orthod; 2012 Jun; 42(3):110-7. PubMed ID: 23112941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of the palatal bone in different facial patterns for orthodontic mini-implants insertion: A cone-beam computed tomography study.
Vidalón JA; Liñan C; Tay LY; Meneses A; Lagravère M
Dental Press J Orthod; 2021; 26(1):e2119204. PubMed ID: 33759963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of interradicular space, soft tissue, and hard tissue of the posterior palatal alveolar process for orthodontic mini-implant, using cone-beam computed tomography.
Lee JA; Ahn HW; Oh SH; Park KH; Kim SH; Nelson G
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2021 Apr; 159(4):460-469. PubMed ID: 33526299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of total bone and cortical bone thickness of the palate for temporary anchorage device insertion.
Chang CJ; Lin WC; Chen MY; Chang HC
J Dent Sci; 2021 Mar; 16(2):636-642. PubMed ID: 33854713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quantitative evaluation of palatal bone thickness in patients with normal and open vertical skeletal configurations using cone-beam computed tomography.
Suteerapongpun P; Wattanachai T; Janhom A; Tripuwabhrut P; Jotikasthira D
Imaging Sci Dent; 2018 Mar; 48(1):51-57. PubMed ID: 29581950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Utility of CBCT for the measurement of palatal bone thickness.
Bonangi R; Kamath G; Srivathsa HS; Babshet M
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2018 Jun; 119(3):196-198. PubMed ID: 29486242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Three-dimensional evaluation of the cortical and cancellous bone density and thickness for miniscrew insertion: a CBCT study of interradicular area of adults with different facial growth pattern.
Hasani M; Afzoon S; Karandish M; Parastar M
BMC Oral Health; 2023 Oct; 23(1):753. PubMed ID: 37833666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment of the bone thickness of the palate on cone-beam computed tomography for placement of miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expansion appliances.
Negrisoli S; Angelieri F; Gonçalves JR; da Silva HDP; Maltagliati LÁ; Raphaelli Nahás-Scocate AC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2022 Jun; 161(6):849-857. PubMed ID: 35151529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 3-D Evaluation of temporary skeletal anchorage sites in the maxilla.
Zago H; Navarro RL; Laranjeira V; Fernandes TM; Conti AC; Oltramari PV
J Clin Exp Dent; 2021 Nov; 13(11):e1131-e1139. PubMed ID: 34824700
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessment of palatal mucosal thickness and location of the greater palatine foramen using cone-beam computed tomography: a retrospective study.
Oduncuoğlu BF; Karslioğlu H; Karasu IN; Nisanci Yilmaz MN; Inonu E
Oral Radiol; 2023 Oct; 39(4):784-791. PubMed ID: 37584816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Palatal mucosal measurements in a Japanese population using cone-beam computed tomography.
Ueno D; Sekiguchi R; Morita M; Jayawardena A; Shinpo S; Sato J; Kobayashi K
J Esthet Restor Dent; 2014; 26(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 24548316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effectiveness of 3 methods of anchorage reinforcement for maximum anchorage in adolescents: A 3-arm multicenter randomized clinical trial.
Sandler J; Murray A; Thiruvenkatachari B; Gutierrez R; Speight P; O'Brien K
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jul; 146(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 24974994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The nasopalatine canal, a limiting factor for temporary anchorage devices: a cone beam computed tomography data study.
Tilen R; Patcas R; Bornstein MM; Ludwig B; Schätzle M
Eur J Orthod; 2017 Nov; 39(6):646-653. PubMed ID: 28379399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of the palatal soft tissue thickness by cone-beam computed tomography.
Vu T; Bayome M; Kook YA; Han SH
Korean J Orthod; 2012 Dec; 42(6):291-6. PubMed ID: 23323243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Height difference between the vestibular and palatal walls and palatal width: a cone beam computed tomography approach.
López-Jarana P; Díaz-Castro CM; Falcão A; Falcão C; Ríos-Santos JV; Fernández-Palacín A; Herrero-Climent M
BMC Oral Health; 2021 Mar; 21(1):118. PubMed ID: 33722235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Three-dimensional Evaluation of Interradicular Areas and Cortical Bone Thickness for Orthodontic Miniscrew Implant Placement Using Cone-beam Computed Tomography.
Dharmadeep G; Naik MK; Reddy YM; Cheruluri S; Praveen Raj K; Reddy BR
J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2020 Aug; 12(Suppl 1):S99-S104. PubMed ID: 33149438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Quantitative analysis of maxillary palatal masticatory mucosa thickness and anatomical morphology of palatal vault in Zhejiang province.
Shen C; Gao B; Lyu K; Ye W; Yao H
Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2022 Feb; 51(1):87-94. PubMed ID: 35462468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Three-dimensional morphologic analysis of the maxillary alveolar bone after anterior tooth retraction with temporary anchorage devices.
Ito A; Mayama A; Oyanagi T; Ogura H; Seiryu M; Fukunaga T; Kitaura H; Mizoguchi I
Angle Orthod; 2023 Nov; 93(6):667-674. PubMed ID: 37922391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
