BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

74 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9300836)

  • 1. Treatment of adolescents with Hansaplate/headgear. Influence on face in profile and on dentition.
    Hansson C; Sköld B; Linder-Aronson S
    J Orofac Orthop; 1997 Feb; 58(1):16-29. PubMed ID: 9300836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of activator and high-pull headgear combination therapy: skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue profile changes.
    Marşan G
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Apr; 29(2):140-8. PubMed ID: 17488997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Changes in mandibular growth direction during and after cervical headgear treatment.
    Kim KR; Muhl ZF
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 May; 119(5):522-30. PubMed ID: 11343025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sagittal and vertical changes after treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion according to the Cetlin method.
    Ferro F; Monsurró A; Perillo L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Aug; 118(2):150-8. PubMed ID: 10935955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Long-term soft-tissue response to orthodontic treatment with early cervical headgear--a randomized study.
    Virkkula T; Kantomaa T; Julku J; Pirttiniemi P
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 May; 135(5):586-96. PubMed ID: 19409341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of the reciprocal mini-chin cup appliance.
    Aslan BI; Dinçer M
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Feb; 30(1):80-8. PubMed ID: 18276929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and cervical headgear appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment.
    de Oliveira JN; Rodrigues de Almeida R; Rodrigues de Almeida M; de Oliveira JN
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jul; 132(1):54-62. PubMed ID: 17628251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Facial profile and dental changes before, during and after treatment with Hansaplate/Headgear.
    Hansson C; Sköld B; Linder-Aronson S
    J Orofac Orthop; 2000; 61(1):34-44. PubMed ID: 10682409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Effects of activator and activator headgear treatment: comparison with untreated Class II subjects.
    Türkkahraman H; Sayin MO
    Eur J Orthod; 2006 Feb; 28(1):27-34. PubMed ID: 16093256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Soft tissue changes produced by a banded-type Herbst appliance in late mixed dentition patients.
    de Almeida MR; Flores-Mir C; Brandão AG; de Almeida RR; de Almeida-Pedrin RR
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(2):121-31. PubMed ID: 18575306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A cephalometric comparison of mandibular headgear and chin-cap appliances in orthodontic and orthopaedic view points.
    Arun T; Erverdi N
    J Marmara Univ Dent Fac; 1994 Sep; 2(1):392-8. PubMed ID: 9582620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Changes in soft tissue profile following treatment with the bionator.
    Lange DW; Kalra V; Broadbent BH; Powers M; Nelson S
    Angle Orthod; 1995; 65(6):423-30. PubMed ID: 8702068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Orthopedic cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in class II correction.
    Kirjavainen M; Kirjavainen T; Hurmerinta K; Haavikko K
    Angle Orthod; 2000 Aug; 70(4):317-25. PubMed ID: 10961782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of posttreatment changes in Class II Division 1 patients after nonextraction orthodontic treatment: cephalometric and model analysis.
    Ciger S; Aksu M; Germeç D
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Feb; 127(2):219-23. PubMed ID: 15750542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Preliminary study of non-surgical treatment of severe Class III malocclusion in 18 patients of 12-20 years old].
    Lin JX; Gu Y
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2004 Mar; 39(2):91-6. PubMed ID: 15061874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sagittal changes after maxillary protraction with expansion in class III patients in the primary, mixed, and late mixed dentitions: a longitudinal retrospective study.
    Saadia M; Torres E
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Jun; 117(6):669-80. PubMed ID: 10842110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of the modified maxillary protractor applied to Class III malocclusion with retruded maxilla in early mixed dentition.
    Kajiyama K; Murakami T; Suzuki A
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Nov; 118(5):549-59. PubMed ID: 11094369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Long-term effects of Class III treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances.
    Westwood PV; McNamara JA; Baccetti T; Franchi L; Sarver DM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Mar; 123(3):306-20. PubMed ID: 12637903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of camouflage treatment on dentofacial structures in Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathic patients.
    Demir A; Uysal T; Sari Z; Basciftci FA
    Eur J Orthod; 2005 Oct; 27(5):524-31. PubMed ID: 16049038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.