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 *

74 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9300836)

  • 21. Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the twin block appliance.
    Mills CM; McCulloch KJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Jul; 118(1):24-33. PubMed ID: 10893470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Skeletal effects in class II treatment with the functional mandibular advancer (FMA)?
    Kinzinger G; Diedrich P
    J Orofac Orthop; 2005 Nov; 66(6):469-90. PubMed ID: 16331547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Treatment and posttreatment effects of mandibular cervical headgear followed by fixed appliances in Class III malocclusion.
    Rey D; Angel D; Oberti G; Baccetti T
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Mar; 133(3):371-8; quiz 476.e1. PubMed ID: 18331935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparison of the zygoma anchorage system with cervical headgear in buccal segment distalization.
    Kaya B; Arman A; Uçkan S; Yazici AC
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):417-24. PubMed ID: 19509344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Treatment effects of the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance on patients with Class II malocclusion.
    Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; Berger JL; Chermak DS; Kaczynski R; Simon ES; Haerian A
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Mar; 123(3):286-95. PubMed ID: 12637901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Cervical headgear vs pendulum appliance for the treatment of moderate skeletal Class II malocclusion.
    Mossaz CF; Byloff FK; Kiliaridis S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Nov; 132(5):616-23. PubMed ID: 18005835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment.
    Dolce C; McGorray SP; Brazeau L; King GJ; Wheeler TT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):481-9. PubMed ID: 17920501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. An evaluation of maxillary and mandibular rotational responses with the Clark twin block appliance.
    Lau EY; Sampson WJ; Townsend GC; Hughes T
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 19634464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evaluation of Class II treatment by cephalometric regional superpositions versus conventional measurements.
    Efstratiadis S; Baumrind S; Shofer F; Jacobsson-Hunt U; Laster L; Ghafari J
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Nov; 128(5):607-18. PubMed ID: 16286208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Orthodontic treatment changes of chin position in Class II Division 1 patients.
    LaHaye MB; Buschang PH; Alexander RG; Boley JC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Dec; 130(6):732-41. PubMed ID: 17169735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Cephalometric evaluation of Class II malocclusion treatment with cervical headgear and mandibular fixed appliances.
    Freitas MR; Lima DV; Freitas KM; Janson G; Henriques JF
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Oct; 30(5):477-82. PubMed ID: 18725383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Changes in the soft tissue profile after extraction orthodontic therapy.
    Darendeliler N; Taner L
    J Dent Child (Chic); 2006; 73(3):164-9. PubMed ID: 17367034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effects of cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in the permanent dentition.
    Varlik SK; Iscan HN
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Aug; 30(4):425-30. PubMed ID: 18678761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Class II Division 1 malocclusion with severe overbite: cephalometric evaluation of the effects of orthodontic treatment.
    Marques LS; Ramos-Jorge ML; Araujo MT; Bolognese AM
    World J Orthod; 2008; 9(4):319-28. PubMed ID: 19146013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Effects on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions of protraction and rapid palatal expansion in Class III malocclusion subjects.
    Kilinç AS; Arslan SG; Kama JD; Ozer T; Dari O
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Feb; 30(1):61-6. PubMed ID: 17906307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Activator versus cervical headgear: superimpositional cephalometric comparison.
    Haralabakis NB; Halazonetis DJ; Sifakakis IB
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2003 Mar; 123(3):296-305. PubMed ID: 12637902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [The bionator with extraoral traction--the Wurzburg concept. 1].
    Witt E; Sahm G; Hevia R
    Prakt Kieferorthop; 1990 Nov; 4(4):285-92. PubMed ID: 2135591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effect of maxillary anteroposterior position on profile esthetics in headgear-treated patients.
    Mann KR; Marshall SD; Qian F; Southard KA; Southard TE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Feb; 139(2):228-34. PubMed ID: 21300252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The accuracy of video imaging for mixed dentition and adolescent treatment.
    Hoss K; Sameshima GT; Grubb JE; Sinclair PM
    Angle Orthod; 1997; 67(5):355-64. PubMed ID: 9347109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.