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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

430 related items for PubMed ID: 18929270

  • 1. Condylar growth and mandibular positioning with stepwise vs maximum advancement.
    Hägg U, Rabie AB, Bendeus M, Wong RW, Wey MC, Du X, Peng J.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Oct; 134(4):525-36. PubMed ID: 18929270
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. [Treatment effects of headgear-Herbst appliance].
    Du X, Hägg U.
    Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2004 Feb; 22(1):46-8, 51. PubMed ID: 15017700
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Stepwise advancement versus maximum jumping with headgear activator.
    Wey MC, Bendeus M, Peng L, Hägg U, Rabie AB, Robinson W.
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Jun; 29(3):283-93. PubMed ID: 17556729
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion in adults: stepwise vs single-step advancement with the Herbst appliance.
    Purkayastha SK, Rabie AB, Wong R.
    World J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 9(3):233-43. PubMed ID: 18834006
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of the headgear activator and Herbst appliance--effects and post-treatment changes.
    Phan KL, Bendeus M, Hägg U, Hansen K, Rabie AB.
    Eur J Orthod; 2006 Dec; 28(6):594-604. PubMed ID: 17142260
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Long-term comparison of treatment outcome and stability of Class II patients treated with functional appliances versus bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy.
    Berger JL, Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, George C, Kaczynski R.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):451-64; quiz 516-7. PubMed ID: 15821690
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Disc-condyle Relationships during Class II Treatment with the Functional Mandibular Advancer (FMA).
    Kinzinger G, Gülden N, Roth A, Diedrich P.
    J Orofac Orthop; 2006 Sep; 67(5):356-75. PubMed ID: 16953355
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Comparison of soft-tissue profiles after treatment with headgear or Herbst appliance.
    Sloss EA, Southard KA, Qian F, Stock SE, Mann KR, Meyer DL, Southard TE.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Apr; 133(4):509-14. PubMed ID: 18405814
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Topography and morphology of the mandibular condyle during fixed functional orthopedic treatment --a magnetic resonance imaging study.
    Kinzinger G, Kober C, Diedrich P.
    J Orofac Orthop; 2007 Mar; 68(2):124-47. PubMed ID: 17372710
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Effects of headgear Herbst and mandibular step-by-step advancement versus conventional Herbst appliance and maximal jumping of the mandible.
    Du X, Hägg U, Rabie AB.
    Eur J Orthod; 2002 Apr; 24(2):167-74. PubMed ID: 12001553
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 2. Soft tissue changes.
    Sharma AA, Lee RT.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):473-82. PubMed ID: 15821692
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 1. Hard tissue changes.
    Gill DS, Lee RT.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):465-72; quiz 517. PubMed ID: 15821691
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Stress distribution in the temporomandibular joint after mandibular protraction: a 3-dimensional finite element study. Part 2.
    Gupta A, Hazarey PV, Kharbanda OP, Kohli VS, Gunjal A.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jun; 135(6):749-56. PubMed ID: 19524834
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Stepwise advancement Herbst appliance versus mandibular sagittal split osteotomy. Treatment effects and long-term stability of adult Class II patients.
    Chaiyongsirisern A, Rabie AB, Wong RW.
    Angle Orthod; 2009 Nov; 79(6):1084-94. PubMed ID: 19852598
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 22.