[1] |
Rogers K, Campbell PM, Tadlock L , et al. Treatment changes of hypo-and hyperdivergent Class II Herbst patients[J]. Angle Orthod, 2018,88(1):3-9.
|
[2] |
Elfeky HY, Fayed MS, Alhammadi MS , et al. Three-dimensional skeletal, dentoalveolar and temporomandibular joint changes produced by Twin Block functional appliance[J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2018,79(4):245-258.
|
[3] |
Van Der Plas MC, Janssen KI, Pandis N , et al. Twin block appliance with acrylic capping does not have a significant inhibitory effect on lower incisor proclination[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(4):513-518.
|
[4] |
Stamenković Z, Raičković V, Ristić V . Changes in soft tissue profile using functional appliances in the treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion[J]. Srp Arh Celok Lek, 2015,143(1/2):12-15.
|
[5] |
Drosen C, Bock NC, Von Bremen J , et al. Long-term effects of Class II Herbst treatment on the pharyngeal airway width[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2018,40(1):82-89.
|
[6] |
Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S . Predictive value of masseter muscle thickness and bite force on Class II functional appliance treatment: a prospective controlled study[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2015,37(6):570-577.
|
[7] |
Kang YL, Franchi L, Manton DJ , et al. A cephalometric study of the skeletal and dento-alveolar effects of the modified Louisiana State University activator in Class II malocclusion[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2018,40(2):164-175.
|
[8] |
Khoja A, Fida M, Shaikh A. Cephalometric evaluation of the effects of the twin block appliance in subjects with Class II, division 1 malocclusion amongst different cervical vertebral maturation stages[J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2016,21(3):73-84.
|
[9] |
Zymperdikas VF, Koretsi V, Papageorgiou SN , et al. Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2016,38(2):113-126.
|
[10] |
Candir M, Kerosuo H . Mode of correction is related to treatment timing in Class II patients treated with the mandibular advancement locking unit (MALU) appliance[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(3):363-370.
|
[11] |
Perinetti G, Primožič J, Furlani G , et al. Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances alone or in combination with multibracket appliances: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Angle Orthod, 2015,85(3):480-492.
|
[12] |
Souki BQ, Vilefort PLC, Oliveira DD , et al. Three-dimensional skeletal mandibular changes associated with Herbst appliance treatment[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2017,20(2):111-118.
|
[13] |
Herrera-Sanches FS, Henriques JF, Janson G , et al. Class II malocclusion treatment using Jasper Jumper appliance associated to intermaxillary elastics: a case report[J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2013,18(2):22-29.
|
[14] |
Koretsi V, Zymperdikas VF, Papageorgiou SN , et al. Treatment effects of removable functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2015,37(4):418-434.
|
[15] |
Nakayama T, Sekiya T, Satomi M , et al. Influence of posterior cranial base growth on the therapeutic effect of bite jumping appliance[J]. Orthod Waves, 2017,76(4):215-220.
|
[16] |
Michelogiannakis D, Rossouw PE, Fishman LS , et al. A cephalometric comparison of treatment effects and predictors of chin prominence in Class II division 1 and 2 malocclusions with forsus fatigue-resistant fixed functional appliance[J]. J World Fed Orthod, 2018,7(1):17-23.
|
[17] |
Arreghini A, Trigila S, Lombardo L , et al. Objective assessment of compliance with intra- and extraoral removable appliances[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(1):88-95.
|
[18] |
Giuntini V, Vangelisti A, Masucci C , et al. Treatment effects produced by the twin-block appliance vs the forsus fatigue resistant device in growing Class II patients[J]. Angle Orthod, 2015,85(5):784-789.
|
[19] |
Baysal A, Uysal T . Dentoskeletal effects of twin block and Herbst appliances in patients with Class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2014,36(2):164-172.
|
[20] |
White DW, Julien KC, Jacob H , et al. Discomfort associated with invisalign and traditional brackets: a randomized, prospective trial[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(6):801-808.
|
[21] |
Lu H, Tang H, Zhou T , et al. Assessment of the periodontal health status in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and Invisalign system: a meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018,97(13):e0248.
|
[22] |
Houle JP, Piedade L, Todescan R , et al. The predictability of transverse changes with invisalign[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(1):19-24.
|
[23] |
Moshiri S, Araújo EA, Mccray JF , et al. Cephalometric evaluation of adult anterior open bite non-extraction treatment with invisalign[J]. Dental Press J Orthod, 2017,22(5):30-38.
|
[24] |
Caprioglio A, Grassi T, Lorusso P , et al. Cephalometric changes after headgear anchored to the deciduous second molars in the early mixed dentition[J]. Eur J Paediatr Dent, 2017,18(1):32-36.
|
[25] |
Patel D, Parekh H, Gupta B , et al. Correction of severe class II skeletal discrepancy with fixed twin block and high pull headgear--a case report[J]. Int J Orthod Milwaukee, 2014,25(4):51-55.
|
[26] |
Lima KJ, Henriques JF, Janson G , et al. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and the activator-headgear combination appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2013,143(5):684-694.
|
[27] |
Spalj S, Mroz Tranesen K, Birkeland K , et al. Comparison of activator-headgear and twin block treatment approaches in class II division 1 malocclusion[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2017: 4861924.
|
[28] |
Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB , et al. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the forsus fatigue resistant device versus intermaxillary elastics[J]. Angle Orthod, 2008,78(2):332-338.
|
[29] |
Eissa O, El-Shennawy M, Gaballah S , et al. Treatment outcomes of Class II malocclusion cases treated with miniscrew-anchored forsus fatigue fesistant device: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(6):824-833.
|
[30] |
Turkkahraman H, Eliacik SK, Findik Y . Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional forsus fatigue resistant devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion[J]. Angle Orthod, 2016,86(6):1026-1032.
|
[31] |
Elkordy SA, Abouelezz AM, Fayed MM , et al. Three-dimensional effects of the mini-implant-anchored forsus fatigue resistant device: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Angle Orthod, 2016,86(2):292-305.
|
[32] |
Manni A, Pasini M, Mazzotta L , et al. Comparison between an Acrylic Splint Herbst and an Acrylic Splint Miniscrew-Herbst for mandibular incisors proclination control[J]. Int J Dent, 2014: 173187.
|
[33] |
Rabie A, Chayanupatkul A, Hdgg U . Stepwise advancement using fixed functional appliances: experimental perspectives[J]. Semin Orthod, 2003,9:41-46.
|
[34] |
Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL . Orthodontics: current principles and techniques[M]. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby, Inc., an affliate of Elsevier Inc, 2011. 478-510.
|
[35] |
Purkayastha SK, Rabie AB, Wong R . Treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion in adults: stepwise vs single-step advancement with the Herbst appliance[J]. World J Orthod, 2008,9(3):233-243.
|
[36] |
Aras I, Pasaoglu A, Olmez S , et al. Comparison of stepwise vs single-step advancement with the functional mandibular advancer in Class II division 1 treatment[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017,87(1):82-87.
|
[37] |
Trenouth MJ, Desmond S . A randomized clinical trial of two alternative designs of twin-block appliance[J]. J Orthod, 2012,39(1):17-24.
|
[38] |
Parkin NA, Mckeown HF, Sandler PJ . Comparison of 2 modifications of the twin-block appliance in matched Class II samples[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2001,119(6):572-577.
|