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

142 related items for PubMed ID: 26390140

  • 1. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with Damon and conventional brackets: A retrospective analysis.
    Shook C, Kim SM, Burnheimer J.
    Angle Orthod; 2016 Jul; 86(4):655-60. PubMed ID: 26390140
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Evaluation of maxillary arch dimensional and inclination changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets using broad archwires.
    Atik E, Akarsu-Guven B, Kocadereli I, Ciger S.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Jun; 149(6):830-7. PubMed ID: 27241993
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Role of buccal corridor in smile esthetics and its correlation with underlying skeletal and dental structures.
    Tikku T, Khanna R, Maurya RP, Ahmad N.
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012 Jun; 23(2):187-94. PubMed ID: 22945708
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of transverse maxillary dental arch width changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets in patients requiring premolar extraction - A randomised clinical trial.
    Bashir R, Sonar S, Batra P, Srivastava A, Singla A.
    Int Orthod; 2019 Dec; 17(4):687-692. PubMed ID: 31466930
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Dentoalveolar mandibular changes with self-ligating versus conventional bracket systems: A CBCT and dental cast study.
    Almeida MR, Futagami C, Conti AC, Oltramari-Navarro PV, Navarro Rde L.
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2015 Dec; 20(3):50-7. PubMed ID: 26154456
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Comparative assessment of conventional and self-ligating appliances on the effect of mandibular intermolar distance in adolescent nonextraction patients: a single-center randomized controlled trial.
    Pandis N, Polychronopoulou A, Katsaros C, Eliades T.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Sep; 140(3):e99-e105. PubMed ID: 21889063
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Smile attractiveness in cases treated with self-ligating and conventional appliances with and without rapid maxillary expansion.
    Negreiros PO, Freitas KMS, Pinzan-Vercelino CRM, Janson G, Freitas MR.
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2020 Nov; 23(4):413-418. PubMed ID: 32351017
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols.
    Atik E, Taner T.
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2017 Nov; 22(5):75-82. PubMed ID: 29160347
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with orthodontic treatment. Part 2: attractiveness of the frontal facial smile in extraction and nonextraction outcomes.
    Meyer AH, Woods MG, Manton DJ.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Mar; 145(3):296-304. PubMed ID: 24582021
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Dental inclination with self-ligating and conventional fixed appliances, with and without rapid maxillary expansion.
    Rengifo RM, Peña-Reyes D, de Freitas MR, de Freitas KMS, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, Janson G.
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2019 May; 22(2):93-98. PubMed ID: 30636098
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.