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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8760846)

  • 1. Canine retraction: a comparison of two preadjusted bracket systems.
    Lotzof LP; Fine HA; Cisneros GJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1996 Aug; 110(2):191-6. PubMed ID: 8760846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Employing Tip-Edge brackets on canines to simplify straight-wire mechanics.
    Rocke RT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Oct; 106(4):341-50. PubMed ID: 7942648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances.
    Fleming PS; DiBiase AT; Sarri G; Lee RT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Sep; 136(3):340-7. PubMed ID: 19732667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comparison of white spot lesion formation between a self-ligating bracket and a conventional preadjusted straight wire bracket.
    Polat Ö; Gökçelik A; Arman A; Arhun N
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):e46-50. PubMed ID: 19641768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of anchorage loss between conventional and self-ligating brackets during canine retraction - A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Malik DES; Fida M; Afzal E; Irfan S
    Int Orthod; 2020 Mar; 18(1):41-53. PubMed ID: 31866192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparative anchorage control study between conventional and self-ligating bracket systems using differential moments.
    de Almeida MR; Herrero F; Fattal A; Davoody AR; Nanda R; Uribe F
    Angle Orthod; 2013 Nov; 83(6):937-42. PubMed ID: 23745980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mini-implant anchorage for en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: a clinical cephalometric study.
    Upadhyay M; Yadav S; Patil S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Dec; 134(6):803-10. PubMed ID: 19061808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Duration and anchorage management of canine retraction with bodily versus tipping mechanics.
    Shpack N; Davidovitch M; Sarne O; Panayi N; Vardimon AD
    Angle Orthod; 2008 Jan; 78(1):95-100. PubMed ID: 18193953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mini-screw implant or transpalatal arch-mediated anchorage reinforcement during canine retraction: a randomized clinical trial.
    Sharma M; Sharma V; Khanna B
    J Orthod; 2012 Jun; 39(2):102-10. PubMed ID: 22773673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Treatment with Tip-Edge brackets and differential tooth movement.
    Kesling PC; Rocke RT; Kesling CK
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1991 May; 99(5):387-401. PubMed ID: 2028929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A radiographic comparison of apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment with a standard edgewise and a straight-wire edgewise technique.
    Mavragani M; Vergari A; Selliseth NJ; Bøe OE; Wisth PL
    Eur J Orthod; 2000 Dec; 22(6):665-74. PubMed ID: 11212602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial.
    da Costa Monini A; Júnior LGG; Vianna AP; Martins RP
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 May; 21(4):1047-1053. PubMed ID: 27246754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Anchorage control in bioprogressive vs straight-wire treatment.
    Urias D; Mustafa FI
    Angle Orthod; 2005 Nov; 75(6):987-92. PubMed ID: 16448242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Clinical study of Twin-wires on anchorage on canine retraction].
    Wang GH; Liu P; Ou YM
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2006 Jun; 15(3):332-4. PubMed ID: 16862375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Delayed extraction options with Tip-Edge technique.
    Morein S
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2007; 18(1):21-5. PubMed ID: 17441618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Efficiency of compensatory orthodontic treatment of mild Class III malocclusion with two different bracket systems.
    Aragón MLC; Bichara LM; Flores-Mir C; Almeida G; Normando D
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2017; 22(6):49-55. PubMed ID: 29364379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cephalometric comparison of vertical changes between Begg and preadjusted edgewise appliances.
    Chhibber A; Upadhyay M; Shetty VS; Mogra S
    Eur J Orthod; 2011 Dec; 33(6):712-20. PubMed ID: 21436189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effects of the zygoma anchorage system on canine retraction.
    Cetinsahin A; Dinçer M; Arman-Ozçirpici A; Uçkan S
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Oct; 32(5):505-13. PubMed ID: 20457580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Begg-edgewise diagnosis-determined totally individualized orthodontic technique: foundations, description, and rationale.
    Hocevar RA
    Am J Orthod; 1985 Jul; 88(1):31-46. PubMed ID: 3860011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and archwires in the buccal segments.
    Taylor NG; Ison K
    Angle Orthod; 1996; 66(3):215-22. PubMed ID: 8805917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.