Re: Labio-lingual root control of lower anterior teeth and canines obtained by active and passive self-ligating brackets. Paolo M. Cattaneo; Raaid A. Salih; Birte Melsen; The Angle Orthodontist, 2013;83(4)691–697
To: Editor, The Angle Orthodontist
I want to thank all the authors for their efforts in the preparation of the interesting article “Labio-lingual root control of lower anterior teeth and canines obtained by active and passive self-ligating brackets” published in the July 2013 issue of The Angle Orthodontist. However, several points seem worthy of mention.
-
Since the aim of this study is to evaluate how well the active and passive self-ligating bracket systems are able to deliver the planned buccolingual inclinations, the large difference of mandibular canine inclination prescriptions between Damon 3MX (canines 0°) and In-Ovation R (canines −11°) brackets will become an interference factor, and which may contribute to the result that the In-Ovation R brackets had a tendency towards a better torque control.
-
It may be not proper to use the occlusal plane defined by “average incisor point” as the reference to measure the changes of labiolingual inclinations of mandibular incisors, because those changes can influence the occlusal plane too. Instead, I suggest using other reference planes such as the “mandibular plane”, which will surely not be affected by the incisors.
-
The authors emphasized that the wire sequence prescribed by the manufacturers of the two SL systems was followed exactly, but I want to know how many reverse-curve arch wires are used in each group to reduce overbite. As to my knowledge this kind of wire bending may have some influences on the final inclinations of the lower incisors.
-
As there is no conventional bracket system involved, I don't think the conclusion that “A significant proclination was seen for the mandibular front teeth; the claimed third order torque control of SL systems could not be demonstrated” can be drawn from the present study.