Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research

journal homepage: [Link]/locate/jobcr

Incisor torque expression characteristics in two passive self-ligating

brackets placed at different heights. A finite element investigation
Bernisha R.P, Mishra Gyanda, G. Pradeep Raj, Prasad Chitra *
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Army College of Dental Sciences, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500087, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Objective: This study investigated torque expression in maxillary incisors using two passive self-ligating bracket
Torque types (Damon Q and Pitts 21) placed at different heights using the Finite element method.
Passive self-ligation Materials and methods: Two passive self-ligating brackets, Damon Q (Ormco, USA) and Pitts 21 (OC Orthodontics,
Orthodontic brackets
USA) were 3D modeled using micro-computed tomography. Damon Q (0.022ˮ x 0.028″ slot size) and Pitts 21
Incisor
Bracket height
(0.021ˮ x 0.021″ slot size) brackets were placed on a maxillary central incisor at predetermined vertical heights.
Arch wires of size 0.019ˮ x 0.025″ stainless steel (Damon Q) and 0.020ˮ x 0.020” Titanium Molybdenum (Pitts
21) were placed in the bracket slots.
Results: Pitts 21 brackets showed higher torquing moments at all bonding heights as compared to Damon Q
brackets. The minimum torquing moment was 9.03Nmm at 5 mm for Damon Q and the maximum torquing
moment was 14.92Nmm for Pitts 21 at a bracket bonding height of 8 mm. Total deformation for Pitts 21 at a
height of 5 mm from the incisal edge was 0.61 × 10− 6mm as compared to that of Damon Q which was 0.41 ×
10− 6mm. Lowest Von Mises stress values were at 27.07 MPa in Damon Q brackets at a bracket height of 5 mm
from the incisal edge. Highest Von Mises stress values were 36.80 MPa for Pitts 21 brackets at a bracket height of
8 mm from the incisal edge.
Conclusion: Pitts 21 brackets exhibited superior torquing characteristics compared to Damon Q. Total deforma­
tion in Pitts 21 was higher than Damon Q at all tested bracket bonding heights.

1. Introduction tip and torque values.3 Steiner, in 1952, introduced a rectangular

bracket with slot dimensions of 0.018”. The 0.022″ system showed me­
Torque can be defined as the twisting of a structure about its longi­ chanical advantages especially during sliding mechanics, where a 19″
tudinal axis, resulting in an angle of twist. In orthodontics, it represents x25″ wire was used. The 0.018” system showed superiority in the gen­
the labiolingual or buccolingual crown/root inclination of a tooth. The eration of a couple force when a 17˝x 25˝wire was engaged. The prop­
extent of torque expression depends on a multitude of factors that erties of the arch wire material (elastic modulus and elastic/super elastic
include stiffness or wire resilience, wire size and cross-section, edge behavior) as well as geometry (cross-section and slot dimensions) in­
bevel and manufacturer tolerances, engagement angle of the wire in a fluence torque.4 Torque expression can be achieved by filling the bracket
bracket slot, as well as bracket placement position on a tooth.1 slot with increasing sizes of arch wires during treatment. However, in
Angle introduced the Edgewise system based on three-dimensional most situations, full dimension wires in rectangular slot brackets are
tooth control, which was obtained by engaging a rectangular wire into rarely used, which means a significant percentage of torque built into
a rectangular slot bracket. Torque was achieved using 3rd order bends the bracket is lost due to increased play between a smaller dimension
placed in archwires.2 As a rectangular wire is twisted and inserted into a arch wire and the bracket slot.5 It is essential to consider play since it
bracket slot, the opposite side of the wire contacts the slot, creating a directly affects tooth movement and force transmission to a tooth.
couple and generating moments. Taking advantage of the control Sliding tooth movements require some degree of play in order to mini­
offered by the conventional Edgewise system, Andrews introduced the mize friction, whereas minimal play is required in situations where the
Straight Wire Appliance using tooth specific brackets with inbuilt in-out, wire requires to be deflected (torquing movements). Shima5 et al.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: rbernisha@[Link] (R.P Bernisha), drgyanda@[Link] (G. Mishra), pradeeprajg@[Link] (G. Pradeep Raj), prasadchitra@[Link]
(P. Chitra).

[Link]
Received 30 September 2023; Accepted 6 January 2024
Available online 15 January 2024
2212-4268/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Craniofacial Research Foundation. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
([Link]
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

assessed play between square and rectangular slot brackets by using much is known about the factors affecting torque expression in square
arch wires of varying sizes. The results showed that horizontal play in slot brackets. The effect of arch wire material and dimension on torque
square slots was significantly less than in rectangular slot brackets, expression in square brackets needs to be studied as there are no studies
which means that brackets with square slots can more effectively bring in literature evaluating the same. Also, with focus shifting towards
about tooth movement in the labiolingual direction as well as show aesthetic bracket placement, the Smile Arc Protection protocol advo­
better rotational control with the use of either round or square wires. cates more gingival bracket bonding heights than conventional bonding.
Additionally, the horizontal and vertical play ratios for round and square As the square Self Ligating brackets bonded as per SAP protocol are
wires in square slots were approximately 1.0 which indicates that closer to the Centre of Resistance of the teeth, more tooth deformation
three-dimensional tooth movement can be achieved with uniform play [labio-lingual tooth movement] is postulated and the same needed to be
both in horizontal and vertical directions on the use of square slots. investigated systematically. Finite element method allowed us to study
Self-ligating brackets introduced by Stolzenberg in 1935 have gained the effects of multiple variables in a controlled scenario. Square slotted
popularity over the last few years due to claims of reduced friction and brackets allow for full slot engagement earlier during the treatment,
overall treatment time. Active and passive self-ligation brackets (SLBs) thereby mitigating the effects of play and allowing early and effective
are available where load and moment expression can differ according to torque control.5 The bracket slot size, bracket position and wire selec­
the clinical situation.7 Torque expression characteristics between con­ tion are the some of the most critical clinical variables that an ortho­
ventional rectangular slot brackets and passive SLBs were assessed in a dontist can control. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effect of bracket
systematic review which showed superior torque control in the con­ slot size, arch wire material and dimension and bracket height on torque
ventional bracket type.8 In contrast, active SLBs constantly apply forces expression in maxillary central incisor reflecting a more real –world
on archwires in order to gain better tooth control but this leads to simulation of clinical scenarios. The study had the following objectives:
increased amounts of friction which could be a disadvantage.9 Optimal
maxillary teeth labiolingual inclination is required for good treatment A. To compare torque expression between a rectangular slot passive SLB
outcomes, smile esthetics and anterior guidance. Under torqued incisors (Damon Q) and square slot passive SLB (Pitts 21).
can result in arch length and space discrepancies.10 Another study B. To assess the influence of bracket position on torque expression in
comparing torque expression characteristics between conventional and both bracket types.
two different self-ligating bracket types provided evidence of lower C. To compare the moments generated with engagement of a 0.019˝x
torque expression in the self-ligating bracket types.11 0.025˝stainless steel finishing wire into slots of Damon Q and 0.020˝x
Torque expression can also be influenced by bracket positioning on a 0.020˝ titanium molybdenum (TMA) wire into slots of Pitts 21
tooth. A study by Meyer12 demonstrated a difference of 15◦ in torque brackets.
expression with a 3 mm change in bracket position from the incisal edge.
Miethke13 et al. observed a torque variation of between 10 and 15◦ with 2. Materials and methods
vertical discrepancy of 1 mm during bracket placement. Torque
expression was increased with placement of brackets more gingival from Two passive self-ligating brackets (Damon Q with a rectangular slot
the incisal edges. Clinically, the most commonly used bracket height is 5 dimension of 0.022˝ x 0.028˝ and Pitts 21 with a square anterior slot
mm. This feature can be exploited by clinicians to maintain or improve dimension of 0.021˝x 0.021˝) were mounted on strips of modelling wax
the smile arc for a patient. A consonant smile arc requires upright with radiolucent carbon tape as part of the sample preparation process
positioning of the maxillary incisors for better esthetics and function. prior to scanning. The radiolucent tape prevented the formation of ar­
Use of self-ligating brackets has increased over the past few years tifacts during the scanning process. The brackets were individually
with a significant number of clinicians claiming to use them in routine scanned using a micro computed tomography scanner (Skyscan 1271
practice.14 The Pitts 21 (OC Orthodontics, Oregon, USA) square slot Bruker, Belgium). The mounted samples were scanned in the Digital
passive self-ligating system is a recent introduction utilizing square Imaging and Communications in Medicine format (DICOM) onto a
anterior bracket slots with square wires for increased engagement early compact drive for 45 min with a total of 1000 slices per scan. This
in treatment.15 The benefits of the system according to the manufac­ permitted creation of high-quality models of the brackets with all sur­
turers are full engagement of archwires in anterior bracket slots early in face details. Three -dimensional models of the upper left and right
treatment due to the square slot cross section (0.021˝x 0.021˝) and use of maxillary central incisors were also prepared. Finite element models of
specially designed heat activated 18˝x 18˝, 20˝x 20˝Nickel Titanium and the scanned brackets were obtained and material properties including
20˝x 20˝Titanium Molybdenum Arch wires which permit early tip and Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio were assigned for teeth, brackets
torque control with light forces. Passive SLBs are used due to easier and archwires used in the investigation using values obtained from a
ligation, reduced friction, simple mechanics and supposedly reduced previous study21 as seen in Table 1.
treatment times. However, their torque expression characteristics are A 19˝x 25˝stainless steel finishing wire and a 20˝x 20˝TMA finishing
uncertain due to the complex interactions between the wire and bracket wire were placed in the bracket slots of Damon Q and Pitts 21 respec­
slot which are difficult to determine clinically.16,17 tively. 3D finite element models of both bracket types were based on
Stress-strain measurements for varied materials including living tis­ scanned cross-sections obtained with the micro-CT scanner in DICOM
sues can be carried out using FEM (Finite element method). Complex format. The DICOM files were then imported into Mimics Research 21.0
bioengineering problems can be solved using this method.18 FEM can be software where the data underwent processing to convert the scans into
utilized to simulate various treatment methods and observe responses
without the need for animals or patients.19 However, FEM results may
Table 1
show a variation of up to 20% from real world conditions.20 Average material property values.
The study aimed to determine efficacy of the Pitts 21 square slot
S. Linear -elastic material Young’s modulus of Poisson’s
passive SLB system in comparison to a rectangular slot passive SLB
No. parameters elasticity, E (MPa)21,34 Ratio
system (Damon Q, Ormco Corp, Glendora, USA) in order to assess torque
expression characteristics in the maxillary central incisors for brackets 1. Teeth 20,000 0.30
2. Brackets 180,000 0.3
placed at varying heights from the incisal edge. The brackets were 3. Titanium Molybdenum 86,000 0.3
scanned using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) and later Arch wire
modeled using FEM. Square slot [0.018″ x 0.018’’] brackets have been 4. Stainless steel 1.93E +0.5 0.3
developed for lingual5 and labial6 treatment in recent times to 5. Cortical bone 14.5 0.3
6. Spongy bone 1.37 0.3
compensate for the deleterious effect of horizontal play. However, not

99
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

stereolithography (STL) format. Masking was carried out by capturing bracket, respectively. The geometric models were then converted into
the required region using a masking tool in Mimics software with use of finite element models. The elements could be one, two or three
Mimics Multiple Slice Edit segmentation tools to add or remove entities. -dimensional and in various shapes and were connected at key points by
The 3D models in STL format were then converted to solid models by nodes. A total of 1885715 elements were connected by 647,722 nodes
exporting data to Ansys Space Claim R 22.0 software, where cleanup and for Damon Q and 333,210 elements were connected by 65,412 nodes for
model checking was performed. The solid models were imported into Pitts 21 brackets.
Solid Works 2021 where models were recreated according to the actual The mechanical properties assigned to the elements were isotropic
bracket dimensions. (having physical properties of the same value when measured in
A 3D computer aided drafting (CAD) model obtained from Turbo different directions) and linear elastic (linear relationships between the
Squid (Turbo Squid, New Orleans, USA) served as the base for teeth. components of stress and strain). Each structure was assigned a specific
From this CAD model, modifications were made using Solid Works to material property. Ansys Mechanical R22.0 was then used for importing
alter tooth geometry according to dental anatomy literature. A 3D model models with 0% data loss. The software performed automatic meshing
of the maxillary right and left central incisor was constructed from the with defined material properties. In structural linear static Finite
CAD model. Brackets were placed onto the teeth models at pre­ Element Analysis (FEA), the governing equation is typically derived
determined heights and a 0.019˝ x 0.25˝ SS and a 0.020˝ x 0.020˝ TMA from the equilibrium of forces. The fundamental equation is based on
archwire inserted into the bracket slots of a Damon Q and Pitts 21 Newton’s second law and can be expressed as [K]. [U] = [F], where [K]

Fig. 1. Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets placed at different heights.

100
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

is the stiffness matrix representing the stiffness of the structure, [U] is remains poor due to slot deformation under loading.
the vector of nodal displacements and [F] is the vector of applied nodal In this study, a twist of 1◦ was given to both archwires tested in order
forces. to observe torquing moments at variable bracket placement heights.
This equation is derived from the equilibrium of forces and the Total deformation as measured by crown or root displacement, was
assumption that the deformation is small and follows Hooke’s Law. higher in Pitts 21 than Damon Q at all tested bracket bonding heights
Solving this system of equations provides the nodal displacements and ranging from 5 mm to 8 mm from the incisal edge. The minimum total
subsequently the stress and strain distributions within the structure.22 deformation of 0.61 × 10− 6mm and 0.41 × 10− 6mm was observed at a
The brackets were placed at heights of 5 mm, 6 mm, 7 mm and 8 mm bracket bonding height of 5 mm from the incisal edge for Pitts 21 and
from the incisal edge in both bracket types and torque moments Damon Q, respectively (Figs. 2A and B). Maximal deformation at a
generated with use of full-size wires were recorded (Fig. 1). The results bonding height of 8 mm from the incisal edge was 1.23 × 10− 6 mm for
were evaluated from graphical and numerical formats obtained. Pitts 21 in contrast to 1.11 × 10− 6 mm for Damon Q as seen in Table 3.
The increased deformation values in Pitts 21 brackets compared to
3. Results Damon Q at all tested bracket bonding heights imply superior tooth
movement in Pitts 21.
The results are discussed under the following sections:
3.3. Stress generated on central incisors including roots with engagement
1. Comparison of incisor torque expression in Damon Q and Pitts 21 of prescribed full-size wires into both tested bracket slots
brackets placed at heights of 5, 6, 7 and 8 mm from the maxillary
central incisor edge. Von Mises stress values are used in the finite element method where
2. Total deformation (tooth movement) of the central incisors on they allow a combination of principal stresses into an equivalent stress
engagement of a 0.019˝ x 0.025˝ SS wire into the bracket slot of a comparable to yield stress.23 Von Mises stress values also showed sig­
Damon Q bracket and engagement of a 0.020˝x 0.020˝TMA wire into nificant differences between Pitts 21 and Damon Q brackets at variable
the bracket slot of a Pitts 21 bracket. bracket heights (Figs. 3A and B). Lowest Von Mises stress values were at
3. Stress generated on central incisors, including roots with engage­ 27.07 MPa in Damon Q brackets at a bracket height of 5 mm from the
ment of prescribed full-size wires into both tested bracket slots. incisal edge. Highest Von Mises stress values were 36.80 MPa for Pitts 21
brackets at a bracket height of 8 mm from the incisal edge as in Table 4.

3.1. Comparison of incisor torque expression in Damon Q and Pitts 21 4. Discussion

brackets placed at heights of 5, 6, 7 and 8 mm from the maxillary central
incisor edge Bracket positioning on the maxillary incisor labial surface and
expression of torque using two popular passive self-ligating brackets was
The torquing moments generated in Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets analyzed in this study using the finite element method. The results
bonded on the maxillary central incisor at 5, 6, 7 and 8 mm heights from indicated that displacement of the crown and root in both tested bracket
the incisal edges were calculated. The archwires used in the investiga­ types was affected by bracket positioning. The individual bracket pre­
tion were 19˝ x 25˝ SS for Damon Q and 20˝ x 20˝ TMA for Pitts 21. scription also had an effect on overall stresses seen at the level of the
Torquing moments showed an increase for both bracket types tested as bracket.
the bonding height was increased from 5 mm to 8 mm. Pitts 21 brackets Maxillary central incisors were selected since they are the most
showed higher torquing moments at all bonding heights as compared to visible teeth during speech and smiling. Torque of the maxillary incisors
Damon Q brackets. The minimum torquing moment was 9.03Nmm at 5 is fundamental in establishing anterior guidance and an aesthetic smile
mm for Damon Q and the maximum torquing moment was 14.92Nmm line. Currently, there is little evidence on the torque characteristics of
for Pitts 21 at a bracket bonding height of 8 mm. Least torquing mo­ various bracket and archwire combinations at different heights from the
ments for both bracket types were observed at a bonding height of 5 mm incisal edge. This can be attributed to the complexity of the experi­
from the incisal edge. Maximal torquing moments for both bracket types mental configuration required in laboratory studies. Variation in torque
were observed at a height of 8 mm from the incisal edge as evident in expression can be due to several factors including manufacturing pro­
Table 2. cess, material properties, ligation methods, bracket type (conventional,
self-ligating) and wire-bracket combinations. Aside from bracket pre­
scription, bracket placement also affects the expression of desired
3.2. Total deformation (tooth movement) of the central incisors on amount of torque.20 As the labial contour of the crown surface varies at
engagement of a 0.019˝x 0.025˝SS wire into the bracket slot of a Damon Q different heights on the tooth crown, an archwire, fully engaged in a
bracket and engagement of a 0.020˝x 0.020˝TMA wire into the bracket slot bracket, will produce different axial inclinations at different crown
of a Pitts 21 bracket heights.24 Batni et al. evaluated torque expression of a right permanent
maxillary central incisor with varying bracket positions using PEA
During torquing, the archwire is twisted inside the bracket slot which brackets. For all models, torque expression increased incrementally by
in turn generates a torque force on the tooth. These forces may also 6◦ as the bracket height from the incisal edge was changed from 3 mm to
deform the bracket slot in addition to tooth movement. Bracket slot 4.5 mm and 6 mm, irrespective of the crown root angulations. With
deformation under torque loads can generally be observed in brackets of increase in the crown-root angles of a tooth, the torque expression away
poor manufacturing quality. In those situations, torque expression from the incisal edge increases.25
In this study, Damon Q rectangular slot and Pitts 21 square slot
Table 2 brackets were placed at heights of 5, 6, 7 and 8 mm from the incisal edge
Torque moment values of Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets. with recommended final wires of 0.019˝ x 0.025˝ SS in Damon Q and
S. Bracket Torque moment values of Torque moment values of 0.020˝x 0.20˝TMA in Pitts 21 brackets with a 1◦ wire twist incorporated
No height Damon Q brackets Pitts 21 brackets in order to observe torque expression differences in both groups. Both
1. 5 mm 9.03 Nmm 9.14 Nmm groups showed an increase in torque values with gingival positioning of
2. 6 mm 10.13 Nmm 11.01 Nmm brackets with the square Pitts 21 bracket showing higher torque
3. 7 mm 12.09 Nmm 12.78 Nmm expression. This can be explained due to the large amount of play be­
4. 8 mm 14.11 Nmm 14.92Nmm
tween the archwire and bracket slot of Damon Q where the final

101
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

Fig. 2A. Total deformation of Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets at 5 mm and 6 mm heights.

archwire is a 0.019˝x 0.025˝SS in a rectangular slot of dimension 0.022˝x 4 in contrast to rectangular slot brackets which use 0.019ˮ x 0.025″ SS
◦

0.028˝. The study results are in accordance with the findings of van wires in 0.022ˮ x 0.028″ slots with a significant play of 11◦ and reduced
Loenen et al. who stated that torque expression showed a consistent torque expression.14 In view of these findings, square slot SLBs seem to
increase as brackets were placed more gingivally from the incisal edge. enable more efficient and faster tooth movement due to superior torque
Therefore, when bonded as per the SAP (Smile Arc Protection) protocol, expression compared to rectangular slot [Link] transmission is
square brackets may permit greater torque control and allow superior also limited by the material characteristics of the bracket. Deformation
incisor crown and root positioning. of bracket slot when a full size archwire is engaged, results in loss of
Torque expression in passive rectangular slot self-ligating brackets torque and subsequent undesirable root movements (torque loss).
has been a subject of debate due to the nature of the slot. The play be­ Fischer-Brandies27 evaluated the effect on torque using three different
tween the bracket slot walls and the archwire effectively minimizes the sizes of stainless steel archwires in 0.018ˮ slot conventional brackets.
moment applied in wires of cross-section smaller than the terminal. They reported notching of the slot walls and additional widening of the
Dalstra et al. provided evidence of larger torsional play ranging from bracket slot up to 0.016 mm. Papageorgiou20 et al. demonstrated that
19.8 to 36.1 in rectangular slot passive SLBs when compared to con­ both bracket prescription and bracket height had a considerable effect
◦ ◦

ventional SLBs.26 This results in inadequate torque expression on on displacement of root apex and crown tip. Incisal bracket placement
insertion of a final wire of prescribed size making complex wire bending was associated with less root apex movement and gingival bracket
mandatory in most instances. Shima et al. reported that horizontal and placement produced more root apex movement. Harikrishnan28 et al.
vertical play was significantly lesser in brackets with square slots reported a gradual increase in slot deformation from the bottom to the
(0.020ˮ x 0.020″) compared to rectangular slots (0.022ˮ x 0.028″). top of the slot in both stainless steel and ceramic brackets. It was also
Additionally, the horizontal and vertical play ratios for the round and evident that the mean slot deformation increases in direct proportion to
square wires within the square slot were approximately 1.0. Conse­ increase in archwire size, slot size and angle of twist. Such slot defor­
quently, square-slotted brackets can more effectively achieve mation of a bracket directly impacts torque transfer to the tooth.26 In
three-dimensional tooth movement, including labio-lingual and rota­ this study, as the brackets were positioned more gingivally, greater tooth
tional tooth movements.5 Pitts 21 (0.021ˮx0.021″) square slot brackets deformation was observed for both prototypes tested. Meling29 et al.
on engagement of 0.020ˮx0.020″ TMA archwires show reduced play of estimated effective bracket slot height by using a formula that described

102
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

Fig. 2B. Total deformation of Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets at 7 mm and 8 mm heights.

in the positions determined by measuring the distance from the incisal

Table 3
edge appears to be more accurate in the vertical dimension for the upper
Total deformation of Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets.
and lower anterior teeth. Furthermore, Pitts 21 brackets produced
S. Bracket Total deformation values of Total deformation values of greater crown-root movement compared to Damon Q at all heights
No height Damon Q Pitts 21
tested. This could be attributed to the use of square wires with minimal
6 6
1. 5 mm 0.41 × 10− mm 0.61 × 10− mm play in square slots as well as superior material properties. As per the
6 6
2. 6 mm 0.51 × 10− mm 0.98 × 10− mm
6 6 manufacturer’s claims, Pitts21 brackets provide the tightest tolerances
3. 7 mm 0.89 × 10− mm 1.10 × 10− mm
4. 8 mm 1.11 × 10− 6
mm 1.23 × 10− 6
mm at ± .001″ versus ± .003″ for other brands. Combined with the reduced
slot size of 0.021″, it could result in less deformation, thereby improving
efficiency of torque transfer, evident from greater crown-root
the relationship between bracket slot height, wire dimensions, wire edge movement.
bevel, and torsional play. With a torque measuring instrument, the Square slot [0.018’’x 0.018’’] brackets have been developed for
torsional play was estimated for 10 different brackets (0.018-inch stated lingual5 and labial6 treatment in recent times to compensate for the
slot) of the same manufacturer and type. With known torsional play, deleterious effect of horizontal play. However, not much is known about
wire dimensions and edge bevel, the bracket slot height could be the factors affecting torque expression in square slot brackets. The effect
calculated. One arch wire with known dimensions and edge bevel was of arch wire material and dimension on torque expression in square
used for all the measurements. Because bracket slots have a slight brackets needs to be evaluated as there are no studies in literature at
tapering toward the base, the effective slot height will be slightly present. Also, with focus shifting towards aesthetic bonding, Smile Arc
different for a square arch wire than for rectangular archwire. Various Protection protocol advocates more gingival bracket bonding heights
bracket slot height in square and rectangular archwire affects torque than conventional bonding.31 As the square Self Ligating brackets
expression. Armstrong et al.30 compared accuracy in bracket positioning bonded as per SAP protocol are closer to the centre of resistance of the
between two techniques — localizing the centre of the clinical crown teeth, more tooth deformation [labio-lingual tooth movement] is
and measuring the distance from the incisal edge. Placement of brackets postulated and the same needs to be investigated systematically.

103
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

Fig. 3A. Stress on central incisor with Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets at 5 mm and 6 mm heights.

Torquing movements are also known to generate strain in the peri­ environment other than play, such as friction, tooth morphology etc.
odontal ligament at the apical third of the tooth and in bracket walls in have not been considered in this study. In the present study, the adjacent
contact with wire edges.32 In this study, highest von Mises stress teeth were not considered for analysis and it was assumed that brackets
generated in the central incisor in both bracket types were concentrated bonded on them were at the same level as the modeled tooth. Slot size in
in the cervical 3rd of crown and increased as the brackets were bonded Pitts 21 system varies between anterior brackets (0.021”x 0.021″), pre­
more apically. As less stresses were generated in Damon Q compared to molar brackets (0.021”x 0.023″) and molar tubes (0.021”x 0.024″). This
Pitts 21, it implies better engagement of the final square archwire in a variation may change the torque expression as play varies. The response
Pitts 21 bracket slot. Better slot engagement coupled with gingival of PDL was not factored in, and it was assumed that the PDL possesses
bracket placement in Pitts 21 brackets may thus permit early and better isotropic and elastic behavior.24 In Pitts 21 bracket system, 70% torque
control of incisor torque. The study’s depth in analyzing torque expression is achieved with 0.020”x 0.020″ Thermally Active Niti arch
expression at various heights from the incisal edge, comparing different wire. Variation in torque expression with different arch wires was not
bracket types, and exploring stress distribution within brackets adds studied.33 In this study, arch wire was twisted 1◦ before insertion into
significant value. It addresses a specific aspect of orthodontic treatment, the bracket slot. The effect of different angles of torsion on torque
providing insights into the behavior of these brackets in varying sce­ expression have not been considered.32
narios. It provides comprehensive insights into how these variables Manufacturing and material dependent parameters such as edge
impact tooth movement. Thus, it can be said that the literature has very form, cross-section and hardness of archwire and brackets have not been
limited evidence substantiating factors affecting torque expression in investigated. Effect of elastic deformation of bracket slot on the torque
square labial brackets with square Titanium alloy wires at different expression is not considered in this study.28 All these factors could have
bracket bonding heights. effects on study result validity and should be factored in while making
At the same time, some limitations in the study also should be clinical decisions.
highlighted. The factors affecting tooth movement in the oral

104
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

Fig. 3B. Stress on central incisor with Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets at 7 mm and 8 mm heights.

Bracket slot design, material used, bracket height and the angle of
Table 4
engagement are responsible for overall torque expression characteristics
Von mises stress values of Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets.
in a system.
S. Bracket Von mises stress values of Von mises stress values of
No height Damon Q Pitts 21
Funding
1. 5 mm 27.07Mpa 28.91Mpa
2. 6 mm 28.55Mpa 31.82Mpa
3. 7 mm 31.18Mpa 33.09Mpa The study was self funded.
4. 8 mm 34.40Mpa 36.80Mpa

Declaration of competing interest

5. Conclusions
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Both Damon Q and Pitts 21 brackets exhibit increased torque
expression when placed at a height of 8 mm from the edge of the Acknowledgements
maxillary central incisor compared to placements at 5, 6, and 7 mm
heights. Pitts 21 brackets exhibited superior torque expression when Nil.
compared to Damon Q at all heights tested. Torque moments increased
as brackets were positioned more gingivally. Pitts 21 brackets generated
References
greater torquing moments, tooth deformation and von Mises stress
compared to Damon Q at all heights implying better wire-slot engage­ 1. Huang Y, Keilig L, Rahimi A, Reimann S, Bourauel C. Torque capabilities of self-
ment, greater torquing moments, and tooth movement with this system. ligating and conventional brackets under the effect of bracket width and free wire
length. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2012 Nov;15(4):255–262.

105
R.P Bernisha et al. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research 14 (2024) 98–106

2. Angle EH. The latest and best in orthodontic mechanism. Dent Cosm. 1928;70: 20. Papageorgiou SN, Sifakakis I, Keilig L, et al. Torque differences according to tooth
1143–1158. morphology and bracket placement: a finite element study. Eur J Orthod. 2017 Aug
3. Andrews LF. The straight-wire appliance explained and compared. J Clin Orthod. 1;39(4):411–418.
1976:174–176. 21. Fercec J, Glisic B, Scepan I, et al. Determination of stresses and forces on the
4. Arreghini A, Lombardo L, Mollica F, Siciliani G. Torque expression capacity of 0.018 orthodontic system by using numerical simulation of the finite elements method.
and 0.022 bracket slots by changing archwire material and cross section. Prog Acta Phys Pol. 2012;(122):33–36.
Orthod. 2014 Sep 25;15(1):1–18. 22. Moaveni S. Finite Element Analysis Theory and Application with ANSYS. vol. 3. e.
5. Shima Y, Takemoto K, Koyama A. Comparative evaluation of square and rectangular Pearson Education India; 2011.
slot three-point play behavior. Dent Mater J. 2020;39(5):735–741. 23. Ghosh J, Nanda RS, Duncanson MG, Frans Currier G. Ceramic bracket design: an
6. Scuzzo G, Takemoto K, Takemoto Y, Scuzzo G, Lombardo L. A new self-ligating analysis using the finite element method. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;108:
lingual bracket with square slots. J Clin Orthod. 2011 Dec;45(12):682–690. ; quiz 575–582.
692. 24. Sardarian A, danaei SM, Shahidi S, Boushehri SG, Geramy A. The effect of vertical
7. Brauchli LM, Senn C, Wichelhaus A. Active and passive self-ligation - a myth? Angle bracket positioning on torque and the resultant stress in the periodontal ligament—a
Orthod. 2011 Mar;81(2):312–318. finite element study. Prog Orthod. 2014 Dec 1;15(1).
8. Al-Thomali Y, Mohamed RN, Basha S. Torque expression in self-ligating orthodontic 25. Batni S, Shetty V, Manasawala T, Mujumdar D. Evaluation of torque expression with
brackets and conventionally ligated brackets: a systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. varied bracket positions and varying crown-root angles of maxillary central incisor –
2017;9(1):123–128. a 3 dimensional finite element study. Indian J Orthod Dentofacial Res. 2022 Dec 28;8
9. Pandis N, Bourauel C, Eliades T. Changes in the stiffness of the ligating mechanism (4):249–253.
in retrieved active self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Dec; 26. Dalstra M, Eriksen H, Bergamini C, Melsen B. Actual versus theoretical torsional play
132(6):834–837. in conventional and self-ligating bracket systems. J Orthod. 2015 Jun 1;42(2):
10. Mittal M, Thiruvenkatachari B, Sandler PJ, Benson PE. A three-dimensional 103–113.
comparison of torque achieved with a preadjusted edgewise appliance using a Roth 27. Fischer-Brandies H, Orthuber W, Es-Souni M, Meyer S. Torque transmission between
or MBT prescription. Angle Orthod. 2015 Mar 1;85(2):292–297. square wire and bracket as a function of measurement, form and hardness
11. Huang Y, Keilig L, Rahimi A, et al. Numeric modeling of torque capabilities of self- parameters. J Orof Orthop/Fortschr der Kieferorthopädie. 2000 Jul;61:258–265.
ligating and conventional brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Nov;136 28. Harikrishnan P, Magesh V, Ajayan AM, JebaSingh DK. Finite element analysis of
(5):638–643. torque induced orthodontic bracket slot deformation in various bracket-archwire
12. Meyer M, Nelson G, Berkeley D. Preadjusted edgewise appliances: theory and contact assembly. Comput Methods Progr Biomed. 2020 Dec 1;197:33–35.
practice. Am J Orthod. 1979;73:12–17. 29. Meling TR, Odegaard J, Seqner D. On bracket slot height: a methodologic study. Am
13. Miethke RR. Third order tooth movements with straight wire appliances: influence J Orthod. 1998;113:387–393.
of vestibular tooth crown morphology in the vertical plane. J Orofac Orthop. 1997 30. Armstrong D, Shen G, Petocz P, Darendeliler MA. A comparison of accuracy in
Jul;58:186–197. bracket positioning between two techniques - localizing the centre of the clinical
14. Harradine NW. Self-ligating brackets: where are we now? J Orthod. 2014 Dec 16: crown and measuring the distance from the incisal edge. Eur J Orthod. 2007 Oct;29
23–38. (5):430–436.
15. Pitts T. Begin with the end in mind: bracket placement and early elastics protocol for 31. Pitts T. Begin with the end in mind: bracket placement and early elastics protocols
smile arc protection. Clin Impr. 2009;17(1):1–11. for smile arc protection. Clin Impr. 2009;17(1):1, 1.
16. Badawi HM, Toogood RW, Carey JPR, Heo G, Major PW. Torque expression of self- 32. Papageorgiou SN, Keilig L, Vandevska-Radunovic V, Eliades T, Bourauel C. Torque
ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 May;133(5):721–728. differences due to the material variation of the orthodontic appliance: a finite
17. Berger JL. The influence of the SPEED bracket’s self-ligating design on force levels in element study. Prog Orthod. 2017 Dec;18:1–8.
tooth movement: a comparative in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990 33. Archambault A, Major TW, Carey JP, Heo G, Badawi H, Major PW. A comparison of
Mar 1;97(3):219–228. torque expression between stainless steel, titanium molybdenum alloy, and copper
18. Cattaneo PM, Dalstra M, Melsen B. The finite element method: a tool to study nickel titanium wires in metallic self-ligating brackets. Angle Orthod. 2010 Sep;80
orthodontic tooth movement. J Dent Res. 2005 May;84(5):428–433. (5):884–889.
19. Yang C, Wang C, Deng F, Fan Y. Biomechanical effects of corticotomy approaches on 34. Amornvit P, Rokaya D, Keawcharoen K, Thongpulsawasdi N. Stress distribution in
dentoalveolar structures during canine retraction: a 3-dimensional finite element implant retained finger prosthesis: a finite element study. J Clin Diagn Res: J Clin
analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Sep 1;148(3):457–465. Diagn Res. 2013 Dec;7(12).

106