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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proper 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: At 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. CONCLUSIONS: The 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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".