243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7786859)
1. Cephalometric analysis of changes produced by a modified Herbst appliance in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion.
Sidhu MS; Kharbanda OP; Sidhu SS
Br J Orthod; 1995 Feb; 22(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 7786859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mechanisms of Class II correction induced by the crown Herbst appliance as a single-phase Class II therapy: 1 year follow-up.
Jakobsone G; Latkauskiene D; McNamara JA
Prog Orthod; 2013 Sep; 14():27. PubMed ID: 24326090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Skeletal and dental components of Class II correction with the bionator and removable headgear splint appliances.
Martins RP; da Rosa Martins JC; Martins LP; Buschang PH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Dec; 134(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 19061799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty.
Baccetti T; Franchi L; Stahl F
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jun; 135(6):698.e1-10; discussion 698-9. PubMed ID: 19524823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Effects of the Herbst appliance in growing orthodontic patients with different underlying vertical patterns.
Deen E; Woods MG
Aust Orthod J; 2015 May; 31(1):59-68. PubMed ID: 26219148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Dentoskeletal effects of the Bite-Jumping Appliance and the Twin-Block Appliance in the treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial.
Burhan AS; Nawaya FR
Eur J Orthod; 2015 Jun; 37(3):330-7. PubMed ID: 25296729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. A cephalometric and tomographic evaluation of Herbst treatment in the mixed dentition.
Croft RS; Buschang PH; English JD; Meyer R
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Oct; 116(4):435-43. PubMed ID: 10511673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes concurrent to use of Twin Block appliance in class II division I cases with a deficient mandible: a cephalometric study.
Sharma AK; Sachdev V; Singla A; Kirtaniya BC
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2012; 30(3):218-26. PubMed ID: 23263425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dental and skeletal components of Class II open bite treatment with a modified Thurow appliance.
Jacob HB; dos Santos-Pinto A; Buschang PH
Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 24713556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Treatment effects produced by Fränkel appliance in patients with class II, division 1 malocclusion.
Rodrigues de Almeida M; Castanha Henriques JF; Rodrigues de Almeida R; Ursi W
Angle Orthod; 2002 Oct; 72(5):418-25. PubMed ID: 12401050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Initial and late treatment effects of headgear-Herbst appliance with mandibular step-by-step advancement.
Hägg U; Du X; Rabie AB
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Nov; 122(5):477-85. PubMed ID: 12439475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Treatment effects produced by preorthodontic trainer appliance in patients with class II division I malocclusion.
Das UM; Reddy D
J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent; 2010; 28(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 20215669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Dental and skeletal changes in patients with mandibular retrognathism following treatment with Herbst and pre-adjusted fixed appliance.
de Abreu Vigorito F; Dominguez GC; de Arruda Aidar LA
Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(1):46-54. PubMed ID: 24713559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
