Home | About Us | Editorial Board | Current Issue | Archives | Search | Instructions | Subscription | Feedback | e-Alerts | Login 
Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Official publication of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
 Users Online: 1065  
  Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size

  Table of Contents    
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 31  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 3-9

Dental implants in growing children

1 Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implantology, Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University, Dental College, Azamgarh, Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Pedodontics, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implanotlogy, S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication27-May-2013

Correspondence Address:
S K Mishra
Department of Maxillofacial Prosthodontics and Implantology, Dental College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.112392

Rights and Permissions



The replacement of teeth by implants is usually restricted to patients with completed craniofacial growth. The aim of this literature review is to discuss the use of dental implants in normal growing patients and in patients with ectodermal dysplasia and the influence of maxillary and mandibular skeletal and dental growth on the stability of those implants. It is recommended that while deciding the optimal individual time point of implant insertion, the status of skeletal growth, the degree of hypodontia, and extension of related psychological stress should be taken into account, in addition to the status of existing dentition and dental compliance of a pediatric patient.

Keywords: Children, dental implants, ectodermal dysplasia, growth, oligodontia

How to cite this article:
Mishra S K, Chowdhary N, Chowdhary R. Dental implants in growing children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013;31:3-9

How to cite this URL:
Mishra S K, Chowdhary N, Chowdhary R. Dental implants in growing children. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent [serial online] 2013 [cited 2022 Sep 26];31:3-9. Available from: http://www.jisppd.com/text.asp?2013/31/1/3/112392

   Introduction Top

Congenital partial anodontia and traumatic tooth loss are frequently encountered in pediatric patients. In such cases, oral rehabilitation is required even before skeletal and dental maturation has occurred. Removable partial denture is the treatment of choice, but it has certain complications like increased caries rate, periodontal complications, and increased residual alveolar resorption. Many authors have discussed the use of implants in children. Dental implants for children are a new treatment modality. There are two primary concerns: (i) First, if implants are present during several years of facial growth, there is a danger of them becoming embedded, relocated, or displaced as the jaw grows. (ii) The second area of concern is the effect of prosthesis on growth. Design changes must be incorporated into such prosthesis to compensate for growth changes. [1] From a physiologic stand point, the conservation of bone may be the most important reason for use of dental implant in a growing patient. In case of congenital partial anodontia, little alveolar bone is present and placement of dental implant changes the load mechanism on bone and retards its resorption. So, these advantages must be weighed against the lack of long-term in vivo evidence-based studies supporting the use of dental implants in a child. [2]

Review of literature

A systematic review of available articles published from 1963 to 2011, obtained from the PubMed database, was done using the terms "Growth," "Children," Dental Implants," Ectodermal dysplasia," and "Oligodontia," which are presented in [Table 1] and [Table 2]. Articles published in languages other than English were excluded. [Table 1] shows the synopsis of studies on growth and its influence on dental implants. [Table 2] shows the synopsis of studies of implant placement in ectodermal dysplasia (ED) and oligodontia patients.
Table 1: Synopsis of studies on growth and their influence on dental implants

Click here to view
Table 2: Synopsis of studies on implant placement in ectodermal dysplasia and oligodontia patients

Click here to view

Growth determination

It is an important factor when planning implant placement in children and adolescents. No reliable indicator is available to determine when growth has ceased, although a good quality method is the use of serial cephalometric radiograph taken 6 months apart with superimposed orthodontic tracings. If no changes occur over a period of 1 year, one may assume that growth is complete. [3]

Oral findings of ectodermal dysplasia

It includes multiple tooth abnormalities such as anodontia, hypodontia, and tapered, malformed, and widely spaced teeth. Abnormal alveolar ridge development also may be present. Other physical signs can involve the sweat glands, scalp, hair, nails, skin pigmentation, and craniofacial structures (e.g. cleft lip and cleft palate). Children with ED do not have normal patterns of growth, and a risk and benefit analysis must be made to assess the value of implant placement, especially in anterior mandible where lateral growth is usually completed by 3 years of age. [4],[5],[6]

Suggestions for implant placement in unaffected patients

Extreme caution must be used in placing implants in children because of growth changes in jaw and the dentition.

  1. Whenever possible, implant placement must be delayed until the age of 15 years for girls and 18 years for boys. [3]
  2. Growing patient treated with dental implant should have adequate follow-up. [3]
  3. Further research is needed in the areas of implants in growing children. [3]
  4. Implant location, the sex of the patient, and the skeletal maturation level are the most important factors in the final decision of when to place implant. [7]
  5. It is still recommended to wait for the completion of dental and skeletal growth, except for severe cases of ED. [7]
Recommendation for implant placement by quadrant

Maxillary anterior quadrant is an important area for consideration due to traumatic tooth loss and frequent congenital tooth absence. [8] Vertical and anteroposterior growth changes in this area are substantial. The vertical growth of the maxilla exceeds all other dimensions of the growth in this quadrant; therefore premature implant placement can result in the repetitive need to lengthen the transmucosal implant connection which leads to poor implant-to-prosthesis ratios and the potential to load magnification. [2] According to Krant, [9] the placement of implants in the anterior maxillary quadrant before the age of 15 in female patients and 17 in male patients should be attempted to achieve unique treatment planning goals and with particular emphasis on the only determination of skeletal age, informed consent, and the possibility of future implant replacement.

Maxillary posterior quadrant is subject to same general growth factors described for the maxillary anteroposterior area. An additional growth factor is transverse maxillary growth at midpalatal suture, which produces rotational growth that anteriorizes the position of the maxillary molars. Placement of osseointegrated dental implants in the maxillary posterior quadrant is best delayed until the age of 15 years in females and 17 years in males. [2]

Mandibular anterior quadrant is the best site for the placement of an osseointegrated implant before skeletal maturation. Mandibular anterior quadrant presents fewer growth variables. The closure of the mandibular symphyseal suture occurs during the first 2 years of life. Prosthesis supported by dental implants in the anterior mandible should be of a retrievable design to allow for an average increase of dental height of 5-6 mm as well as the anteroposterior growth. [2]

Mandibular posterior quadrant

The dynamic growth and development of the posterior mandible in the transverse and anteroposterior dimensions coupled with its rotational growth presents multiple treatment concerns. Placement of osseointegrated implants in the posterior mandibular quadrant is best delayed until skeletal maturation. [2]

   Discussion Top

The benefits of implant use in growing patients are as important as the concerns for their premature use. Reports were published by Cronin et al. and Smith et al. [10] documenting the placement of endosseous implants in the anterior mandibular region as early as 5 years of age with positive treatment results. Prachar and Vaneek [11] present the results of a 5-year study on the use cylindrical or screw implants in adolescents of age 15-19 years. Regardless of the criterion used, the rate of success was always higher than 96% over the 5 years of study, whereas Shaw [12] reported that the dramatic growth changes occurring in infancy and early childhood were not conducive to the maintenance of implants. Prosthesis remodeling, as stated by Smith et al., [13] Brugnolo et al., [14] Guckes et al., [4] and Kearns et al., [15] is an undesirable condition due to the repetitive need to lengthen the transmucosal implant-to-prosthesis ratios and the potential load magnification. According to Dietschi and Schatz [16] and Mackie and Quayle, [17] implant placement in children younger than 16-18 years must be avoided.

According to Guckes et al., [18] bone volume in children may not be sufficient for the placement of implants in ideal positions for prosthesis support. In the totally anodontic patient, the vertical and anteroposterior changes in alveolar development may not be as important as in the partially anodontic patient in whom considerable dental changes can be expected with growth. Bergendal et al. [19] stated that implants must be placed when growth is almost complete, except for rare cases of total aplasia as in ED. Elsewhere, it had been recommended that treatment with implants must be delayed until the age of 13 years, since an implant placed at the age of 7 or 8 may not be in a favorable position at the age of 16 years. At the consensus conference on oral implants in young patients, it was agreed that implants should not be placed until growth and skeletal development is completed or nearly completed. [20]

Congenital anodontia is a rare condition and is seen mostly as a feature in heritable syndromes. Anodontia of the mandible is most commonly found in ED of the hypohydrotic type. [20] It is rare. Small children with no teeth at all in the mandible present special treatment challenges in the effort to normalizing the appearance and function during the years of growing up. Treatment with removable dentures around the age of 3 years is recommended by the largest support group of ED, the National Foundation for ED, in the USA. [20],[21] Implants in the mandibular anterior region can be placed to support an overdenture, from the age of around 6 years, when the median sutures of the mandible is closed. [22],[23]

According to the 1988 National Institute of Health consensus Development Conference on Dental Implants at Bethesda, pediatric patients with ED could benefit from the use of dental implants. [24]

Following the presented case and review of literature by Kramer et al. [25] in their article, they recommended the insertion of implants in those pediatric patients who suffer from extended syndromal hypodontia, such as seen in ED. The most suitable site for insertion seems to be the anterior mandible; insertions in the maxilla should be avoided or at least should not cross the midline. Ryda [26],[27] established that all clinical judgment and treatment for children should be performed according to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Respect the child's development physically as well as psychologically.

From 1995, several case reports on children with ED have been published on the placing the implants in the canine region of the anodontic mandible to support an overdenture from the age of 3 to 6 years. [4],[13],[22] The youngest child reported was a French boy who had implants placed at the age of 1.5 years. [28] Placement of dental implants cannot be recommended before the age of 6 years, since it is well established that children can and should take part in decisions on elective surgery from the age of around 5 years. [29] The first published case of placing implants in a boy with hypohydrotic ED and anodontia of the mandible was treated at the Institute of Jonkoping and has been followed for more than 20 years. Overdenture served well until the patient was 19 years old, when two additional implants were placed and the patient was provided with a mandibular fixed implant supported prosthesis. [30]

The timing of implant placement in growing patients was discussed at a Scandinavian Consensus Conference in Sonkoping, Sweden, [31] where there was a general agreement that implant placement should be postponed until skeletal growth is completed or nearly completed in normal adolescents. In the individual with oligodontia or anodontia, however, earlier intervention could be indicated, especially in the mandible.

Anodontia and severe oligodontia were mentioned as exceptions to the rule.

   Conclusion Top

Published reports on the use of dental implants in young patients are as yet very limited; long-term clinical studies are necessary for sound conclusions. If the goals of treatment planning favor implant use before skeletal maturation, parents of the child need to be informed about the benefits and possible complications of its use. More emphasis has to be given during prosthesis planning. Still, some children are treated with implants, and there are a few in whom the therapy may result in a better quality of life. However, the treatment can only be justified when the anticipated positive effects are greater than the drawbacks of the procedure. Furthermore, when utilizing techniques that are still not fully evaluated for the purpose intended, as clinicians and scientists, we have a greater responsibility of follow-up and monitoring the outcome. In order to determine the optimal individual time point of implant insertion, the status of skeletal growth, the degree of hypodontia, and extension of related psychological stress should be taken into account in addition to the status of existing dentition and dental compliance of the pediatric patient.[48]

   References Top

1.Oesterle LJ, Cronin RJ Jr, Ranly D. Maxillary implants and the growing patient. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:377-87.  Back to cited text no. 1
2.Cronin RJ Jr, Oesterle LJ. Implants use in growing patients. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42:1-35.  Back to cited text no. 2
3.Brahmin JS. Dental Implants in Children. Oral Maxillofacial Surg Clin N Am 2005;17:375-81.  Back to cited text no. 3
4.Guckes AD, Mc Carthy GR, Brahmin J. Use of Endosseous implants in a 3 year old child with ectodermal dysplasia: Case report and 5 year follow up. Pediatr Dent 1997;19:282-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
5.Fetre-Maia N. Ectodrmal Dysplasia. Hum Hered 1971;21:309.  Back to cited text no. 5
6.Lowry RB, Robinson GC, Miller JR. Hereditary ectodermal dysplasia: Symptoms, inheritance patterns, differential diagnosis, management. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1966;5:395-402.  Back to cited text no. 6
7.Percinoto C, Vieiera AE, Barbieri CM, Melhado FL, Moreira KS. Use of dental implants in children: A litreature review. Quintessence Int 2001;32:381-3.  Back to cited text no. 7
8.Ledermann PD, Hasell TM, Hefti AF. Osseointegrated dental implants as alternative therapy to bridge construction or orthodontics in the young patients seven years of clinical experience. Pediatr Dent 1993;15:327-33.  Back to cited text no. 8
9.Kraut RA. Dental implants for children: Creating smilesfor children without teeth. Pract Periodont Aesthet Dent 1996;8:909-13.  Back to cited text no. 9
10.Cronin RJ, Oesterele LJ, Ranley DM. Mandibular implants and the growing patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:55-62.  Back to cited text no. 10
11.Prachar P, Vanek J. Tooth defects treated by dental implants in adolescents. Scr Med (Brno) 2003;76:5-8.  Back to cited text no. 11
12.Shaw WC. Problem of accuracy and reliabiltiy in cephalometric studies with implants in infants with cleft lip and palate. Br J Orthod 1977;4:93-100.  Back to cited text no. 12
13.Smith RA, Vargervik K, Kearns G, Bosch C, Koumjian J. Placement of an endosseous implants in a growing child with ectodermal dysplasia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1993;75:669-73.  Back to cited text no. 13
14.Brugnolo E, Mazzocco C, Cardioli G, Majzoub Z. Clinical and radiographic findings following placement of single tooth implants in young patients. Case reports. Int J Periodont Res Dent 1996;16:421-33.  Back to cited text no. 14
15.Kearns G, Sharma A, Perott D, Schmidt B, Kaban L, Vargervik K. Placement of endosseous implants in children and adolescents with hereditary ectodermal dysplasia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1999;88:5-10.  Back to cited text no. 15
16.Dietschi D, Schartz JP. Current restorative modalities for young patients with missing anterior teeth. Pediaatr Dent 1997;28:231-40.  Back to cited text no. 16
17.Mackie IC, Quayle AA. Implants in children. A case report. Endod Dent Traumatol 1993;9:124-6.  Back to cited text no. 17
18.Guckes AD, Brahim JS, McCarthy GR, Rudy SF, Cooper LF. Using endosseous dental implants for patient with ectodermal dysplasia. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122:59-62.  Back to cited text no. 18
19.Bergendal B, Bergendaln T, Hallonsten AL, Koch J, Kvint S. A multidisciplinary approach to oral rehabilitation with osseointegrated implant in children and adolescents with multiple aplasia. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:119-29.  Back to cited text no. 19
20.Bergendal B, Koch G, Karol J, Wanndahl G, editors. Consensus Conference on Ectodermal Dysplasia with special reference to Dental Treatment. Stockholm, Sweden: Forlagshuset Gothia AB; 1998.  Back to cited text no. 20
21.Bergendal B. Children with ectodermal dysplasia need early treatment. Spec Care Dent 2002;22:212-3.  Back to cited text no. 21
22.Bergendal T, Eckerdal O, Hallonsten AL, Koch G, Kurol J, Kvirt S. Osseointegrated implants in the oral habilitation of a boy with ectodermal dysplasia: A case report. Int Dent J 1991;41:149-56.  Back to cited text no. 22
23.Consensus statement. In: Koch G, Bergendal T, Kvint S, Johansson U, editors. Consensus conference.on Oral Implants In Young Patients. Stockholm, Sweden: Forlagshuset Gothia AB; 1996. p. 125-33.  Back to cited text no. 23
24.Mehrali MC, Baraoidan M, Cranin AN. Use of endosseous implants in treatment of adolescent trauma patients. NY State Dent J 1994;60:25-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
25.Kramer FJ, Baethge G, Tschernitschek H. Implants in children with ectodermal dysplasia: A case report and literature review. Clin Oral Iml Res 2007;18:140-6.  Back to cited text no. 25
26.Ryda U. Children with a needfor extensive oral rehabilitation-Developmental pshychological and ethical aspects. In: Koch G, Bergendal T, Kvint S, Johansson UB, editors. Consensus Conference on Oral Implants in young Patients. Stockholm: Forlagshuset Gothia; 1996.  Back to cited text no. 26
27.Ryda U. Developmental pshychology-some aspects of normal mental growth. In: Bergendal B, Koch G, Karol J, Wanndahl G, editors. Consensus Conference on Ectodermal Dysplasia with special reference to Dental Treatment. Stockholm: Forlagshuset Gothia; 1998.  Back to cited text no. 27
28.Bonin B, Saffarzadeh A, Picard A, Levy P, Romieux G, Goga D. Early implant treatment of a child with anhidrotic ectodermal dysplasia. A propos of a case. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 2001;102:313-8.  Back to cited text no. 28
29.Bradbury ET, Kay SP, Tighe C, Hewison J. Decision making by parents and children in pediatric hand surgery. Br J Plast Surg 1994;47:324-30.  Back to cited text no. 29
30.Bergendal B. When should we extract deciduous teeth and place implants in young individuals with tooth agenesis?. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35(suppl 1):55-63.  Back to cited text no. 30
31.Koch G, Bergendal T, Kvint S, Johansson UB. Consensus Conference on Oral Implants in young Patients. Stockholm: Forlagshuset Gothia; 1996.  Back to cited text no. 31
32.Bjork A. Growth of the maxilla in three dimensions as revealed radiographically by the implant method. Br J Orthod 1977;4:53-64.  Back to cited text no. 32
33.Bjork A. Variation in the growth pattern of the human mandible. A longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res 1963;42:400-11.  Back to cited text no. 33
34.Oesterle LJ, Cronin RJ Jr. Adult growing, aging and the single-tooth implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:252-60.  Back to cited text no. 34
35.Escobar V, Epker BN. Alveolar bone growth in response to endosteal implants in two patients with ectodermal dysplasia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;27:445-7.  Back to cited text no. 35
36.Fudalej P, Kokich VG, Leroux B. Determining the cessation of vertical growth of the craniofacial structures to facilitate placement of single tooth implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:59-67.  Back to cited text no. 36
37.Thilander B, Odman J, Gröndahl K, Lekholm U. Aspects on osseointegrated implants inserted in growing jaws: A biometric and radiographic study in young pig. Eur J Orthod 1992;14:99-109.  Back to cited text no. 37
38.Iris H, Solow B. Continued eruption of maxillary incisors and first molars in girls from 9 to 25 years, studied by implant method. Eur J Orthod 1996;18:245-56.  Back to cited text no. 38
39.Johansson G, Palmquist S, Svenson B. Effects of early placement of a single tooth implants. A case report. Clin Oral Implants Res 1994;5:48-51.  Back to cited text no. 39
40.Stanford CM, Guckes A, Fete M, Sarun S, Richter MK. Perceptions of outcomes of implant therapy in patients with ectodermal dysplasia syndromes. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:195-200.  Back to cited text no. 40
41.Bector KB, Bector JP, Keller EE. Growth analysis of a patient with ectodermal dysplasia treated with endosseous implants: A case report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:864-74.  Back to cited text no. 41
42.Alcan T, Basa S, Kargul B. Growth analysis of a patient with ectodermal dysplasia treated with endosseous implants. 6 year follow up. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:175-82.  Back to cited text no. 42
43.Bergendal B, Ekman A, Nilsson P. Implant failure in young children with ectodermal dysplasia: A retrospective evaluation of use and outcome of dental implant treatment in children in Sweden. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:520-4.  Back to cited text no. 43
44.Guckes AD, Scurria MS, King TS, Mc Carthy GR, Brahmin JS. Prospective clinical trial of dental implants in persons with ectodermal dysplasia. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:21-5.  Back to cited text no. 44
45.Bergendal B. Prosthetic habilitation of a young patient with hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia and oligodontia. A case report of 20 years of treatment. Int J Prosthodont 2001;14:471-9.  Back to cited text no. 45
46.Sweeney IP, Ferguson JW, Heggie AA, Lucas JO. Treatment outcomes for adolescent, ectodermal dysplasia patients treated with dental implants. Int J Pediatr Dent 2005;15:241-8.  Back to cited text no. 46
47.Finnema KJ, Roghoebar GM, Meijer HJ, Vissin KA. Oral rehabilitation with dental Implants in oligodontia patients. Int J Prosthodont 2005;8:203-9.  Back to cited text no. 47
48.Durstberger G, Celar A, Watzek G. Implant-surgical and prosthetic rehabilitation of patient with multiple dental aplasia. A Clinical Report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999 May-Jun;14:417-23  Back to cited text no. 48


  [Table 1], [Table 2]

This article has been cited by
1 9-Year Follow-Up on Maxillofacial Implant-Supported Framework Designed to Accommodate Childhood Growth
Thomas J. Balshi, Glenn J. Wolfinger, Robert Pellecchia, William Reiger, James W. Blakely, Stephen F. Balshi, Mamdouh O. Kachlan
Journal of Prosthodontics. 2022;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Rehabilitation Considerations for Very Young Children with Severe Oligodontia due to Ectodermal Dysplasia: Report of Three Clinical Cases with a 2-Year Follow-Up
Kyriaki Seremidi, Antigoni Markouli, Andreas Agouropoulos, Nick Polychronakis, Sotiria Gizani, Konstantinos Michalakis
Case Reports in Dentistry. 2022; 2022: 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 The use of mini-implants for provisional prosthetic rehabilitation in growing patients: a critical review
Marcos Cezar Pomini, Adriana Postiglione Buhrer Samra, Amanda Regina Fischborn, Vitoldo Antônio Kozlowski Junior, Fabiana Bucholdz Teixeira Alves
Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2021; 65(1): 19
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Augmentation of Narrow Anterior Alveolar Ridge Using Autogenous Block Onlay Graft in a Pediatric Patient: A Case Report
Rajmohan Shetty, Preethesh Shetty, Meghna Bhandary, Amitha M Hegde
International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2021; 14(2): 311
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
Yu. A. Labii, V. P. Gavaleshko, V. I. Rozhko, I. S. Kotelban
Bulletin of Problems Biology and Medicine. 2020; 4(2): 28
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Continuous tooth eruption adjacent to single-implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: aetiology, mechanism and outcomes – A review of the literature
Eitan Mijiritsky, Maram Badran, Shlomi Kleinman, Yifat Manor, Oren Peleg
International Dental Journal. 2020; 70(3): 155
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Surgical repositioning of infra-occluded dental implants in the orthognathic management of a Class III open-bite patient
Kyung-A Kim, Kang-Min Kim, Tae-Hee Lee, Tae-Joon Park, Ki-Ho Park
Australasian Orthodontic Journal. 2019; 35(2): 210
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Evaluation of Masticatory Stimulation Effect on the Maxillary Transversal Growth in Ectodermal Dysplasia Children
Ayman Mourad, Mona G Nahass
International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2017; 10(1): 55
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 Longitudinal Study Focused on Dental Implant Osseointegration and Quality of Life by Adolescent Patients
J. Papež, T. Dostálová, P. Kríž, S. Polášková, J. Feberová, L. Štepánek
Ceská stomatologie/Praktické zubní lékarství. 2015; 115(4): 45
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Variation in Timing, Duration, Intensity, and Direction of Adolescent Growth in the Mandible, Maxilla, and Cranial Base: The Fels Longitudinal Study
Ramzi W. Nahhas,Manish Valiathan,Richard J. Sherwood
The Anatomical Record. 2014; 297(7): 1195
[Pubmed] | [DOI]


Print this article  Email this article


    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Article in PDF (276 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded1933    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 10    

Recommend this journal

Contact us | Sitemap | Advertise | What's New | Copyright and Disclaimer | Privacy Notice
 © 2005 - Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 
Online since 1st May '05