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

203 related items for PubMed ID: 31056418

  • 1. Maxillary protaction with zygomatic anchorage in a growing class III patient.
    Aldaz J, Andrade D, Aguilar E, Bravo M.
    Int Orthod; 2019 Jun; 17(2):395-401. PubMed ID: 31056418
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Midfacial Protraction With Skeletal Anchorage After Pterygomaxillary Separation.
    de Menezes LM, de Oliveira RB, Weissheimer A, Avelar RL.
    J Craniofac Surg; 2016 Sep; 27(6):1561-4. PubMed ID: 27428915
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
    Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):615-24. PubMed ID: 18984393
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. The short-term treatment effects of face mask therapy in Class III patients based on the anchorage device: miniplates vs rapid maxillary expansion.
    Lee NK, Yang IH, Baek SH.
    Angle Orthod; 2012 Sep; 82(5):846-52. PubMed ID: 22264134
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. A new approach to correct a Class III malocclusion with miniscrews: a case report.
    Amini F, Poosti M.
    J Calif Dent Assoc; 2013 Mar; 41(3):197-200. PubMed ID: 23600162
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Comparison of skeletal anchorage and tooth-borne maxillary protraction followed by fixed appliance in Class III malocclusion.
    Lee SH, Koh SD, Chung DH, Lee JW, Lee SM.
    Eur J Orthod; 2020 Apr 01; 42(2):193-199. PubMed ID: 31750516
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 16. The efficacy of maxillary protraction protocols with the micro-implant-assisted rapid palatal expander (MARPE) and the novel N2 mini-implant-a finite element study.
    Moon W, Wu KW, MacGinnis M, Sung J, Chu H, Youssef G, Machado A.
    Prog Orthod; 2015 Apr 01; 16():16. PubMed ID: 26061987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Application and effectiveness of a mini-implant- and tooth-borne rapid palatal expansion device: the hybrid hyrax.
    Wilmes B, Nienkemper M, Drescher D.
    World J Orthod; 2010 Apr 01; 11(4):323-30. PubMed ID: 21490997
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Comparative evaluation of 2 skeletally anchored maxillary protraction protocols.
    Elnagar MH, Elshourbagy E, Ghobashy S, Khedr M, Evans CA.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Nov 01; 150(5):751-762. PubMed ID: 27871701
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. New treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia in cleft patients. Protraction facemask with miniplate anchorage.
    Baek SH, Kim KW, Choi JY.
    Angle Orthod; 2010 Jul 01; 80(4):783-91. PubMed ID: 20482368
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Treatment effects of maxillary protraction with palatal plates vs conventional tooth-borne anchorage in growing patients with Class III malocclusion.
    Lee YS, Park JH, Kim J, Lee NK, Kim Y, Kook YA.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2022 Oct 01; 162(4):520-528. PubMed ID: 35933257
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.