ArticleBMC oral health2025
Comparative study of torque expression and its biomechanical effects: spherical self-ligating bracket with lock-hook system versus passive self-ligating bracket and conventional bracket.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProper torque control is crucial to the outcome of orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to employ finite element analysis to compare the torque capabilities of a novel spherical self-ligating bracket with a lock-hook system against those of commonly used passive self-ligating and conventional bracket systems, as well as to reveal the biomechanical changes in the periodontal ligament (PDL) during torque expression.
methodsA maxillary right central incisor, along with its PDL and alveolar bone, were modeled. Three types of brackets were selected: a spherical self-ligating bracket with a lock-hook system, a passive self-ligating bracket (Damon), and a conventional bracket (Discovery). Each bracket was equipped with a 0.022-inch slot and a 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire. A palatal root torque of 20° was applied. The torque moment, as well as the von Mises stress and strain in the PDL, were calculated. A clinical case involving the lingual inclination of the upper anterior teeth was utilized to assess the feasibility of using the spherical self-ligating bracket with the lock-hook system to express torque.
resultsAt a twist angle of 20°, the maximum torque generated by the spherical self-ligating bracket with a lock-hook system (27.8 N·mm) was approximately 1.6 times greater than that of the Damon bracket (17.5 N·mm) and the Discovery bracket (17.3 N·mm). As the twist angle increased, both the von Mises stress and the strain in the PDL also increased. When the maximum PDL stress was less than 0.026 MPa and the percentage of the PDL good strain area (defined as the area with PDL strain ≥ 0.3%) exceeded 50%, the torque range for the maxillary incisor was between 10.2 and 17.5 N·mm. The clinical case demonstrated that the use of the spherical self-ligating bracket with the lock-hook system effectively corrected the unfavorable linguoclination of the maxillary incisors.
conclusionsThe spherical self-ligating bracket with a lock-hook system can significantly enhance torque expression. The optimal torque range for the maxillary incisor is between 10.2 and 17.5 N·mm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.