The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published October 30, 2015

European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015, 1–11

doi:10.1093/ejo/cjv063

Original article

In vitro biomechanical analysis of torque

capabilities of various 0.018″ lingual bracket–
wire systems: total torque play and slot size
Nikolaos Daratsianos*, Christoph Bourauel**, Rolf Fimmers***,
Andreas Jäger* and Rainer Schwestka-Polly****
*Department of Orthodontics, **Endowed Chair of Oral Technology, ***Department of Medical Biometry, Informatics
and Epidemiology, University of Bonn, and ****Department of Orthodontics, Hannover Medical School, Germany

Correspondence to: Nikolaos Daratsianos, Poliklinik für Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Welschnonnenstr. 17,
53111 Bonn, Germany. E-mail: nikolaos.daratsianos@uni-bonn.de

Summary
Objectives: To determine the total torque play of various rectangular titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA)/
stainless steel (SS) wires in various 0.018″ upper incisor lingual brackets and slot size measurements.
Methods: TMA (0.0175″ × 0.0175″, 0.0170″ × 0.025″, 0.0182″ × 0.0182″, 0.0182″ × 0.025″) and SS wires (0.016″
× 0.022″, 0.016″ × 0.024″, 0.018″ × 0.025″) were twisted in standard (Hiro, Incognito™, Joy®, Kurz 7th
generation, STb™: fixation with elastic modules) and self-ligating brackets (Evolution SLT®, In-Ovation®
L MTM: closed ligation mechanism) from −20 degrees to +20 degrees with a custom-made machine. The
total torque play was calculated by extrapolating the linear portion of the twist/moment curves to the x-
axis and adding the absolute negative and positive angle values at the intercepts. The bracket slot height
was measured before and after the experiments with a series of pin gauges with round profile.
Results: Brackets in ascending order for total torque play with the most slot-filling wire TMA 0.0182″ ×
0.025″: Evolution SLT® (0 degree ± 0 degree), Incognito™ (2.2 degrees ±1.1 degrees), Hiro (5.1 degrees
±3.0 degrees), In-Ovation® L MTM (6.3 degrees ±2.2 degrees), STb™ (6.6 degrees ±1.8 degrees), Kurz 7th
generation (7.1 degrees ±0.8 degrees), and Joy® (12.0 degrees ±0.8 degrees). Wires in ascending order for
total torque play with the most precise slot Incognito™: TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ (2.2 degrees ±1.1 degrees),
TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ (2.4 degrees ±0.9 degrees), SS 0.018″ × 0.025″ (5.5 degrees ±1.0 degrees), TMA
0.0170″ × 0.025″ (9.4 degrees ±1.8 degrees), TMA 0.0175″ × 0.0175″ (13.0 degrees ±1.5 degrees), SS 0.016″
× 0.024″ (16.1 degrees ±1.4 degrees), SS 0.016″ × 0.022″ (17.8 degrees ±1.0 degrees); differences between
some of the experimental groups were not statistically significant. Bracket slot dimensions in ascending
order: Evolution SLT® (less than 0.452 mm), Incognito™ (0.460 mm ±0.002 mm), In-Ovation® L MTM
(0.469 mm ±0.001 mm), Hiro (0.469 mm ±0.010 mm), STb™ (0.471 mm ±0.002 mm), Kurz 7th generation
(0.473 mm ±0.002 mm), and Joy® (greater than 0.498 mm).
Limitations: The applied method must be questioned when used with brackets with incomplete slot
walls (Evolution SLT®). Slot measurement with pin gauges may not register bracket wing deformation.
Conclusions: All brackets showed a differing slot size from the nominal 0.018″ (0.457 mm).
Incognito™ presented the most precise and Joy® the widest slot. The main wires for the
retraction phase SS 0.016″ × 0.022″/SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ showed poor torque control. Among the
finishing TMA wires, TMA 0.0175″ × 0.0175″ exhibited the highest and TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″/TMA
0.0182″ × 0.025″ the smallest torque play.
Significance: The manufacturers could profit from this investigation towards optimization of the
dimensional precision of their products. The orthodontist must be aware of the torque play of the wire–
bracket combinations to be able to plan and individualize the appliance by third order customization.

© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved.
1
For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com
2 European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015

Introduction
Torque, also called moment or moment of force, is the tendency of a
force to rotate an object about an axis (1). In orthodontics, torque is
described as a moment generated by the torsion of a rectangular wire
in the bracket slot (2) and it is employed to alter the buccolingual
inclination of the teeth.
The dimensions of the working archwires never reach the full
dimensions of the bracket slot; therefore, some lack of control exists
between the bracket slot and the wire, known as the ‘play’ or devia-
tion angle or engagement angle. This angle is the amount of rotation
in degrees that a rectangular or square wire must be twisted in order
to engage the slot and generate biomechanical torque. The third-order
clearance often extends to 100% of the prescribed buccolingual tooth
inclination and makes the appliance equivalent to using round wires
(3).
Theoretically, third-order moments can be calculated from the
nominal dimensions of archwires and brackets given by the manu-
facturers, however a considerable discrepancy between the theoreti-
cal and the measured bracket/archwire play should be taken into
consideration (4). This can be attributed to intrinsic variations in
archwire cross-sectional diameters, bracket slot dimensions, arch-
wire edge bevelling, and bracket deformations (5). Accurate calcu-
lation with the manufacturer’s data is therefore impossible and an
experimental approach is recommended instead.
Following the development of lingual orthodontics, there was a
gradual change from ready-for-use appliances combined with self-
bent undersized wires to fully customized systems with slot-filling
wires. Besides, most contemporary techniques are based on a set-up
as a treatment objective, indirect bonding for high precision, and
almost eliminate the need for individual third order wire bends made
by the orthodontist. By changing the buccolingual inclination of the
bracket slot in relation to the tooth and creating an individual base
for each bracket, torque control became more predictable with easy
to fabricate non-twisted (straight) arch wires. Having a set-up as
a treatment objective almost dictates the need for using slot-filling
archwires, in order to achieve the planed tooth position precisely.
Furthermore, lingual bracket slots are positioned at a substantial
distance from the labial surfaces, making the vertical height of the
brackets vary with the torque angle of the labial surfaces and further-
more making torquing adjustments affect not only the inclination of
the labial surfaces but also their heights (6), as high as 1.2 mm/10
degrees in the incisor region and 2 mm/10 degrees in the buccal seg-
ments (7). For these reasons, torque control in lingual orthodontics
is even more important than with buccal appliances, especially for
the upper incisors.
base to fit on the flat surface of the metal axis of the testing
machine; they underwent the usual quality procedure as patient
brackets.
Experimental design
Five randomly chosen brackets out of the received 10–20 from each
type were used for the measurements. A straight 20 mm long piece
of wire was cut and fixed in a slot in a steel axis mounted on the
torque sensor on a motor-driven rotation table of a self-developed,
custom made testing machine (Figure 1a–c) introduced earlier (8).
The brackets were bonded on the surface of another steel axis
that was mounted on an opposing motor-driven rotation table by
application of a two-component polymethylmetacrylate (Stabilit
Express, Henkel AG & Co, Düsseldorf, Germany). The steel axis
with the bracket was manually adjusted as needed to an estimated
zero torque position in relation to the wire and then immobilized.
The wire was secured in the bracket slot with one elastic module
(QuiK-StiK™, 3M Unitek Corporation, Monrovia, USA) as a simple
overtie, the only ligature type which could be fixed on all brackets
in a reproducible way; the self-ligating brackets were tested with
closed ligation mechanism. The length of the wire between the end
of the bracket slot and the interception into the opposite axis was
kept constant through all experiments at 4.6 mm, simulating a typi-
cal clinical upper central incisor interbracket distance for a lingual
appliance (9). The measuring moment sensor was placed on the wire
side on the rotation table, and the wire was fixed exactly in the mid-
dle of the rotation table in order to deliver pure moments and pre-
vent linear forces, which would influence the measured moment. The
Table 1. The used brackets and wires and their manufacturers.
Standard brackets
Hiro Medics XXI, Spain
Incognito™ TOP-Service für Lingualtechnik,
3M Unitek Corporation, Bad Essen,
Germany
Joy® Adenta GmbH, Gilching, Germany
Kurz 7th generation Ormco Corporation, Orange,
California, USA
STb™ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
California, USA
Self-ligating brackets
Evolution SLT® Adenta GmbH, Gilching, Germany
In-Ovation® L MTM Dentsply GAC International Bohemia,
New York, USA

Purpose of the study Wires

The purpose of this study was to determine the torque play of several
commonly used rectangular titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA) and TMA 0.0175″ × 0.0175″ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
California, USA
stainless steel (SS) wires in lingual orthodontics for applying or con-
TMA 0.0170″ × 0.025″ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
trolling torque in the guiding, retraction, and finishing phase inside
California, USA
the bracket slot of common upper incisor 0.018″ × 0.025″ lingual TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ Dental Devices and Supplies Ltd,
brackets and to measure their slot size. Leicestershire, UK
TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
California, USA
Materials and methods SS 0.016″ × 0.022″ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
All brackets and wires used in this study along with their manu- California, USA
facturers’ information are listed in Table 1. They were sponsored SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ Dental Devices and Supplies Ltd,
Leicestershire, UK
by the companies and received between January and June 2010.
SS 0.018″ × 0.025″ Ormco Corporation, Orange,
The Incognito™ brackets were specially manufactured with a slot
California, USA
used for upper central incisors and a flat instead of a tooth-fitting
N. Daratsianos et al.
(a)
A/D
Sensor
Motor
FLEX
Figure 1. (a) Scheme of the experimental design. (b) The testing machine
had two rotation tables (rectangular black boxes). The right rotation table
was disabled but it could be linearly manually adjusted to achieve a full wire
engagement in the slot. The bracket was bonded on a steel axis, which was
fixed to the right rotation table. The wire was fixed to the left rotation table,
which was activated to apply the twist to the wire. The moment sensor (big
silver cylinder) was placed between the left rotation table and the fixation
point of the wire. (c) Close-up of the testing machine with a stainless steel
wire and a STb™ bracket.
motor-driven rotation table on the wire side was rotated against the
immobilized bracket into the starting position, −20 degrees from the
estimated zero torque position, followed by a continuous rotation
to a maximum of +20 degrees and back to −20 degrees. Since the
zero torque position was only an estimation and a result of manual
adjustment, this procedure ensured that there would be enough lin-
ear part of the graph, i.e. that the wire would engage in the slot,
so that the torque play calculation would be possible regardless of
any third-order misalignment between bracket and wire. A personal
3
computer controlled the motor and registered the torquing moments
sent from the sensor for every 0.2 degrees with a resolution of
0.03 Nmm. 200 moment values were registered for the way forward
and another 200 for the way back.
In a preliminary experiment, the reproducibility of the measuring
procedure was tested by comparing three mean curves: an overall
1
∑
n
⋅ xi
σi
i =1
mean, a weighted mean (10) x = and a random mean,
1
∑ i =1 σ
n
plotted after testing different specimens of the same kind, each for
five repeated measurements (9). The comparison showed minimal
systematic error (e.g. 0.25 degrees at 1.0 Nmm), allowing us to
conduct the study without any repeats with identical specimens.
However, the experiment was conducted a total of five times for each
material combination, each time with different bracket and wire
specimens of the same type, to eliminate any systematic error due
to manufacture inconsistency of the bracket slot and deformation of
the wire. Each bracket specimen was tested with all seven wire types.
Each wire specimen was used once.
Data preparation
The data were plotted in a graph in Excel 2010 (Microsoft
Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA) (Figure 2a). Since there
was a slight difference between the increasing and decreasing slope of
the graphs, especially in the middle part while the wire was not fully
engaged, an average of the clockwise and counter clockwise twist was
calculated (Figure 2b), except for the bracket Evolution SLT®. The
difference vanished and the endpoints of the curves coincided once the
wire was twisted beyond the torque play angle and engaged in the slot,
a behaviour described previously (11) that can be probably explained
by unequal friction between the clockwise and counter clockwise
twist. Averaging the way forward and backward curves led inherently
to a change of the angular values for a given moment—mainly in the
middle of each graph—but without influencing the torque play values,
which were calculated from the nearly coinciding linear ending parts
of the curves. With Evolution SLT®, there was a critical difference in
the entire shape of the plots and only the activation curves (from 0
degree to +20 degrees and from 0 degree to −20 degrees) were used for
further analysis without any averaging process (Figure 2d).
In some cases, the testing came up with plots being off-centre
in the horizontal and vertical dimension, due to lack of accuracy in
third-order centring of the wire in the bracket slot, especially when
using undersized wires. In these cases, the way-forward way-back-
averaged plots were centred by moving the data in Excel in a manual
procedure, so that the point of change of the direction of convexity
in the middle of each graph was approximately at the intercept of
the vertical and horizontal axis (Figure 2c). Since the difference of
the positive and negative torque play value at the intercepts with the
x-axis within one graph was the same regardless of any movement,
this procedure did not influence the results; it was only performed
to allow better averaging and visualization for the graphical plots.
Calculation of the total torque play
After data preparation, the torque play was calculated from every
one of the 245 data series (5 specimens of 7 bracket types tested with
7 wire types), each consisting of 200 moment values correspond-
ing to angle values from −20 to +20 degrees in 0.2 degree steps, by
extrapolating the linear portion of the twist/moment curve back to
the x-axis from both negative and positive twist angle curves.
4 European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015

Figure 2. Data preparation: (a) A typical moment/angle curve without any modifications shows that the clockwise twist of the wire is slightly different than
the anticlockwise twist. The difference decreases with increasing twist angle and the ends of the plot nearly coincide. (b) A typical averaged curve, which was
calculated by averaging the clockwise and anticlockwise original curves of (a). The graph is a little off centre, both horizontally and vertically, due to imprecise
centring of the undersized wire (SS 0.016″ × 0.022″) in the bracket slot. (c) The curve of figure was centred both vertically and horizontally. The reference point
was the change of the direction of convexity in the middle of each graph, which was moved to be at the intercept of the vertical and horizontal axis. (d) Typical
angle/moment curve of Evolution SLT®. The upper curve shows the way forward and the lower the way backward. On the first part of the way forward and
backward, there is a bend at about −14 degrees/+14 degrees, which does not exist in the further part of the curves. This effect is probably due to the elasticity
of the active clip and the friction, which create different effects in the activation and deactivation curves. Therefore, only the last part of the way forward and
backward (activation part of the curves) was used for the measurements.

The linear parts of the plots were selected with the following trendlines for negative moments at the negative part of the x-axis, the
procedure: calculated values were neglected and were manually set at 0 degree so
as to eliminate invalid torque values. The same was done if the slope
- Most curves became linear beyond 15 degrees (Supplementary of the plots reversed within one twist forward or backward.
Figure 1a); therefore all data between −15.0 degrees and 15.0
degrees were neglected for the calculation.
Statistical analysis
- The graphs of the remaining data were visually checked and were
The results were visually summarized in bar graphs using IBM
used if they were linear in toto; in a few cases in which this was not
SPSS Statistics 22 (IBM Corporation, New York, New York, USA).
the case, only a smaller-linear-part of the curve was considered.
The dependence of torque play from bracket and wire type was
- For the curves which had been manually centred, any data being
primarily analysed using a two-factorial analysis of variance.
beyond the 20 degrees range were not used; if values beyond 15
Since this analysis revealed a clear interaction (P < 0.001) between
degrees were missing, a linear part within the 15 degrees range
bracket and wire, subsequent analyses were performed comparing
was chosen after visual confirmation for linearity.
the dependence torque play/bracket for each of the different wires
and of torque play/wires for each of the different brackets. These
The corresponding negative and positive angle at the intercept of
analyses were done using a one-factorial analysis of variance fol-
the two trendlines of the linear parts with the x-axis were calculated
lowed by Tukey’s test (α = 5%) for post hoc comparison. A further
with the function ‘TREND’ in Excel 2010 (Supplementary Figure 1b
correction for the multiplicity of testing for the different wires was
and 1c), and their absolute values were summarized as the total
not performed.
torque play for every one of the 245 data sets. Within each bracket-
wire group (consisting of five brackets and wires of the same type) an
average and a standard deviation was calculated from the five total Measurement of the slot size
torque play values using Excel 2010. If the trendlines for positive The height of the bracket slots was measured before and after
moments did not intercept at the positive part of the x-axis and the the experiments by consecutively inserting a series of pin gauges
N. Daratsianos et al.
with increasing round profile (Azurea Jauges AJ SA, Belprahon,
Switzerland, Supplementary Figure 2), a measurement procedure
used in a similar fashion in prior experiments (12). If a gauge showed
no friction in the slot, the next biggest gauge was inserted. If a gauge
would not fall from the manually stabilized bracket slot by itself,
the measurement was terminated and the size of the last gauge with
no friction was defined as the slot size. The available gauges had a
measuring range of 0.452–0.498 mm (equivalent 0.0178–0.0196″)
and an increment of 0.002 mm. The slots of the self-ligating brackets
were measured with closed ligation mechanism.
Results
Torque measurements
Graphical plots of the measurements of the twist angle and the corre-
sponding moments for two of the seven wires are shown in Figure 3a
and 3b; they are average plots computed from five individual meas-
urements. Some irregularities at the right or left end of the curves
are the result of the averaging process, as some of the five individual
graphs ended at lower angles than 20 degrees after being manually
centred. The graphical plots are shown for visualization purposes
only, the values presented in the tables and boxplots were calculated
from the data series. The calculated total torque play, as an expres-
sion of an angle value calculated by adding the absolute negative
and positive values at the intercept of the trendline of the linear part
of each curve with the x-axis is presented in Table 2 (sorted by wire
type) and in Table 3 and Figure 4 (sorted by bracket type).
The smallest torque play for all wires was found with Evolution
SLT® (with all wires 0 degree) and the highest torque play, in six
out of seven wires, with Joy® (12.0–24.3 degrees). The ascend-
ing bracket order for torque play with the most slot filling wire
TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ was: Evolution SLT®, Incognito™, Hiro,
In-Ovation® L MTM, STb™, Kurz 7th generation, and Joy®.
The difference of torque play found between the brackets Hiro,
In-Ovation® L MTM, STb™, and Kurz 7th generation was
not statistically significant for all the wires. The torque play of
Incognito™ and Hiro could not be statistically differentiated for all
wires except for TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″. No statistically signifi-
cant difference was found between the torque play of Incognito™
and In-Ovation® L MTM for all wires except TMA 0.0182″ ×
0.025″. The difference of the torque play between Incognito™ and
Evolution SLT® was not statistically significant when tested with
both the most slot filling wires TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ and TMA
0.0182″ × 0.025″ (Table 2).
The highest torque play for six out of seven brackets was meas-
ured with SS 0.016″ × 0.022″ (17.8–23.0 degrees) and the least
with TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ (2.2–12.0 degrees) for all brackets.
The ascending wire order for torque play in combination for exam-
ple with the smallest bracket slot Incognito™ (ignoring Evolution
SLT®) was: TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″, TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″, SS
0.018″ × 0.025″, TMA 0.0175″ × 0.025″, TMA 0.0175″ × 0.0175″,
SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ and SS 0.016″ × 0.022″. The torque play of SS
0.016″ × 0.022″ and SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ could not be statistically
distinguished from each other for six out of seven brackets. The dif-
ferences of the torque play between TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″, TMA
0.0182″ × 0.0182″, and SS 0.018″ × 0.025″ were not statistically
significant for all brackets except Incognito™; with Incognito™
only TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ and TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ could
not be differentiated. The torque play of 0 degree found for all
wires in combination with Evolution SLT® could not be differenti-
ated between the wires (Table 3).
5
Measurement of the slot size
The average slot heights before and after the experiment are pre-
sented in Table 4. The slot of Evolution SLT® with closed spring
was smaller than the smallest pin gauge (0.452 mm equiv. 0.0178″)
and the slot of Joy® exceeded the size of the biggest pin gauge
available for this study (0.498 mm, equiv. to 0.0196″); therefore,
both could not be measured. All brackets showed a divergent slot
from the nominal 0.018″. Evolution SLT® showed the smallest
(less than 0.452 mm, equiv. less than 0.0178″) and Joy® the wid-
est slot (greater than 0.498 mm, equiv. greater than 0.0196″). The
brackets in ascending slot size order were as follows: Evolution
SLT®, Incognito™, Hiro/In-Ovation® L MTM, STb™, Kurz 7th
generation, and Joy®.
All measured brackets showed a tendency to deform when torque
had been applied to the slots. Most slots were widened by 0.003 mm
after twisting 7 pieces of wire from −20.0 degrees to +20.0 degrees.
STb™ deformed the most (0.006 mm) and In-Ovation® L MTM the
least (0.001 mm).
A statistical analysis was not performed, because not all the
bracket slots could be measured and the differences were of minor
magnitude.
Discussion
Torque play
We considered the play between a single rotated bracket and the wire.
Our experimental setting was similar to that used in prior studies
(13,14). However, we implemented a smaller measurement increment
of 0.2 degrees (instead of 3 degrees) in order to yield higher resolu-
tion in our graphs and we used one (instead of two) neighbouring fix-
ation point resulting in moment values of half magnitude. In a finite
element study, the simulated torque moment curves showed three
regions with different slope-steepness, depending on whether the
wire was engaged in the central or also in the neighbouring brackets
(15). The slope-steepness depends also on the interbracket distance,
which was kept constant through all experiments, and the Young’s
modulus of the wire material. Nevertheless, the point of interception
of the trendlines with the x-axis and consecutively the torque play is
independent of the slope-steepness; only torquing moments measured
after the engagement of the wire are method sensitive.
Torque expression before wire engagement in the slot due to the
stretching of the elastomeric module was negligible when we tested
it in a preliminarily experiment but it could theoretically contribute
to the absence of a sharp bend on the angle-moment plots (Figure 3a
and 3b). Elastic ligatures can deliver low torque moment; however,
the clinical effect is doubtful (16). Furthermore, bracket design prob-
ably influences the stretching of the ligature and its torque expres-
sion before engagement. Nevertheless, the rounding of the curves
was not relevant for the results since these were calculated from the
intercept of the trendline of the linear end part of each plot. It has to
be taken into consideration that potential torque play can be partly
or completely eliminated by using appropriate (stiffer) ligatures tied
before the wire starts generating torque (17). This can be impor-
tant, especially since in the clinical situation elastomeric ligatures
are affected by moisture and heat, exhibit rapid and significant force
loss up to 67 % (18–20), and deform permanently when stretched,
qualities that preclude their use when complete arch wire seating is
needed (21).
The engagement angle can be measured directly (22) and indirectly
from the twist/moment curve when a positive torque moment is first
observed (5), or can be calculated by extrapolating the linear portion
6 European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015

of the twist/moment curve to the x-axis. The latter method assumes
a linear relationship between the angle and the moment immediately
after engagement, which is non-existent in reality, because of a curve
‘lag’ with present moments prior to archwire engagement (23). We
chose it because it reproduces the ideal conditions of a theoretical
numerical approach with virtual models (15) but uses real specimens
instead and grants a clear and reproducible protocol consistent with
most previous studies (4, 11, 16, 24). We calculated the sum of clock-
wise and counter clockwise play, which has to be taken into consid-
eration when comparing this study to others.
Indeed we noticed a gradual change of moment between the nega-
tive and positive angles with relatively a significant ‘lag’ and rounded
bends instead of sharp bends as in the theoretical numerical study
by Huang et al. (15). This could be caused by various factors such as
the averaging process, irregularities in the manufacturing process of
brackets precluding proper engagement (bracket slot manufacturing
introduces metal particles, grooves, and striations) (3), edge bevel of
wires and brackets, less exact alignment between wire and slot in
20
SS 0.016" x 0.024"
15
10
Moment [Nmm]
the experimental compared to the numerical model, the effect of the
elastic ligature or the spring of the self-ligating brackets, or friction
between the bracket and the wire.
The plots for Evolution SLT® displayed flat slopes with no
bends. Because of the reduced steepness with rising angles, most of
the trendlines for positive moments did not intercept at the positive
part of the x-axis and the trendlines for negative moments did not
intercept at the negative part of the x-axis (Figures 3a and 3b); all
graphical plots were visually controlled, the calculated values were
neglected and manually set at 0 degree so as to prevent invalid nega-
tive torque play values. Inevitably, the torque play of 0 degree for
Evolution SLT® with all wires could not be statistically differenti-
ated between them, indicating that the wire selection does not play a
role; moreover the elastic clip, always pressing even the most under-
sized wire into the slot is the substantial torque control element.
Besides, the clip did not allow torquing moments over 7.0 Nmm
(clinically equivalent to 14.0 Nmm) to be expressed because of its
resilience (Figure 3a and 3b), a fact that can play a beneficial protec-
tive role in clinic.
Between the following combinations, no statistically signifi-
cant differences in torque play could be found (Table 2): Hiro/
In-Ovation® L MTM/STb™/Kurz 7th generation (for all the wires);
Incognito™/Hiro (for all wires except for TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″);
Incognito™/In-Ovation® L MTM (for all wires except TMA
0.0182″ × 0.025″); Incognito™/Evolution SLT® (for TMA 0.0182″

5
× 0.0182″ and TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″). The findings substantiate
0
the similarity of slot dimensions of the mentioned combinations.
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
-5 Remarkably, Incognito™ showed no statistically significant differ-
ences to Evolution SLT® (0 degree torque play) with the most slot
-10
filling archwires.
-15 According to several authors, the mean experimentally measured
engagement angle is higher than the theoretical because the wires
-20
are undersized and have rounded edges (4, 11, 22). These findings
Angle [degrees]
are consistent with our study, which showed that all the combina-
20 tions except Evolution SLT® presented a torque play, even with the
TMA 0.0182" x 0.025" most slot-filling wires (Table 3). Remarkably, even the oversized
15
wire TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ showed torque play with all brackets
10 (except Evolution SLT®), a finding indicating manufacture incon-
sistency. A commonly used finishing wire, TMA 0.0175″ × 0.0175″,
Moment [Nmm]

5
showed the highest torque play among the TMA wires (except with
0 Evolution SLT®), ranging from 13.0 degrees (Incognito™) to 24.3
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 degrees (Joy®), indicating that it is rather unsuitable for finishing
-5
without third order bends when used with an elastic ligature; how-
-10 ever the torque application could be increased with stiffer ligatures
(17). The undersized stainless steel wires SS 0.016″ × 0.022″ and
-15
SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ showed relatively high torque play (except with
-20 Evolution SLT®) of 16.1–23.0 degrees and the differences between
Angle [degrees] them were statistically not significant with six out of seven brackets.
They are used in the guiding and retraction phase allowing sliding
Hiro STb mechanics for extraction cases but, taking the results into account,
Incognito Evolution SLT
they are not capable of retaining the buccolingual inclination of the
Joy In-Ovation L MTM
front teeth; if the latter is a treatment objective, third order bends
Kurz 7th generation
of half of the total torque play angle should be applied in the front
segment (total torque play was defined in this study as the sum of the
Figure 3. Exemplary average torque moment/torque play angle curves of the clockwise and counter clockwise torque play). The oversized TMA
brackets tested with two of the seven wires: SS 0.016” x 0.024” (a) and TMA wires TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ and TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ showed
0.0182” x 0.025” (b). Each plot corresponds to an average data set generated no statistically significant difference in torque play compared to
from 5 data series. The middle, almost plateau-like, portion of each curve is
the nominal slot-filling SS 0.018″ × 0.025″ (for all brackets except
wider in a than in b. This corresponds to the amount of total torque play for
each bracket/wire combination. The projection of the linear parts of the curves
Incognito™, with which only the TMA wires showed no statistically
to the x axis defines the exact boundaries of the total torque play as calculated significant difference), indicating that having this wire assortment
in this study. only makes sense for special situations, where differentiated wire
N. Daratsianos et al.
Table 2. The mean total torque play (degrees) and the standard deviation (in braces) at the intercept of the trendline with the x-axis, sorted
for each wire type ( not to be differentiated at 5% level, Tukey). The total torque play was calculated by adding the absolute
angular values, both positive and negative, for each of the data series.
stiffness is needed, e.g. when moving bigger teeth using higher torqu-
ing moments after engagement or creating stable segments.
Torque play in orthodontic appliances can be both advantageous
and disadvantageous. Some play is desired to compensate for the var-
ying anatomic characteristics among individuals and for the clinical
techniques of different orthodontists. However, since the advent of
the straight-wire technique, orthodontists have constantly increased
the amount of applied torque following the implied concept that
patients may be treated to mean values with relative accuracy (4). The
maximal development in this direction is the use of a setup to plan
the desired tooth position and manufacture an appliance capable of
achieving it. Its effectiveness is based on a minimum tolerance between
wire and bracket slot and thus on the use of full-size wires. This treat-
ment approach can be very effective but can also deliver side-effects if
the anatomical limits are not considered. For example, a full-size wire
could move a root outside the spongious into the cortical bone and
beyond it, creating root resorption and alveolar recession, whereas
an undersized wire in the same situation would move the tooth to a
lesser extent. This problem could arise with most lingual appliances
nowadays, as generally accepted concepts suggest full engagement of
the wire into the slot during finishing. Therefore, a treatment objective
planning via individual setup is necessary and must be done with cau-
tion considering the anatomical limits of the specific patient.
7
Furthermore, a high third-order clearance is favourable, when
the insertion of the wire into the bracket is difficult, like at the lin-
gual side, and can decrease chair time. Early unfavourable lingual
bracket design almost dictated the need for wide slots and nar-
row wires; evolved lingual brackets enabled easier wire insertion.
Imprecise bracket positioning along with the lack of modern resil-
ient and bendable materials made time-consuming chairside bending
essential and the stiff wires had to be highly undersized to be easily
inserted; current lingual appliances incorporate precise laboratory
protocols for optimised device design and positioning which ren-
der chairside bending dispensable. The undersized wires must have
contributed to the initial disappointment with the lingual technique,
which even with increased chair time, delivered poor finishing results
in terms of reduced torque control and consecutively the vertical
tooth position. With contemporary precise lingual appliances, the
use of slot-filling archwires with good torque control is a clinical
reality; the desired tooth position can be achieved quickly, with high
precision (25,26) and practitioner convenience.
Slot size
The measuring procedure with pin gauges can show some minor
reproducibility deficiency, which we minimized by repeating the meas-
urements. When torque is applied, notching and bending-up of the slot
8 European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015

Table 3. The mean total torque play (degrees) and the standard deviation (in braces) at the intercept of the trendline with the x-axis, sorted
for each bracket type ( not to be differentiated at 5% level, Tukey). The total torque play was calculated by adding the absolute
angular values, both positive and negative, for each of the data series.

walls can occur (22), a finding which was confirmed in our study. As
seven wires were tested with the very same bracket, widening of the
slot may have resulted to a systematic error, meaning that the slot size
and consecutively the torque play increased. We reduced this risk by
testing the less stiff wires first. The observed slot widening after the
experiments could also in part originate from micropolishing caused
by the movement of the wire during the experiment in the slot.
All brackets had a bigger slot than 0.018″, except Evolution
SLT®, which showed an undersized slot because the third slot
wall is partially missing, and the active clip extends into the slot
(Supplementary Figure 3). Incognito™ showed the most precise slot
(0.460 mm, equiv. 0.0181″), closest to the nominal size of 0.018″,
probably because of the manufacturing procedure incorporating
the fabrication of an undersized slot trimmed to the final size by
hand and a final manual quality control for every frontal bracket.
Our findings show that there is a high variation in slot size, partly
resulting to high torque play with commonly used wires. The torque
play values are analogue to the slot sizes: the bigger the slot, the
greater is the torque play. The slot size results are the same regard-
ing Incognito™ but slightly differ concerning STb™ and Kurz 7th
generation compared to another study with far more samples (12).
All brackets showed the tendency to deform after torque applica-
tion between 0.001 and 0.006 mm, which was also reported in
other studies with different magnitudes (13,22). Since notching
and micropolishing from twisting a series of wires for 40 degrees is
highly unlikely to happen in a clinical situation, the reported distor-
tion of the slots can be probably neglected in clinical practice.
International standards only describe the requirements relat-
ing to the presentation of the physical properties of orthodontic
brackets and tubes, along with the test methods by which they
can be determined (27,28). However within the German national
standard E DIN 13996:2010-03, standards for the actual preci-
sion of orthodontic attachments are defined, i.e. for a nominal
0.018″ slot, a slot height between 0.018″ (0.457 mm), and 0.0197″
(0.500 mm) is tolerable (29). In the present investigation, all meas-
ured lingual bracket systems fulfilled these requirements; Joy® and
Evolution SLT® could not be measured, because they exceeded the
range of the available gauges (0.452–0.498 mm). Nevertheless, the
importance of setting even narrower precision range in standards
becomes apparent as, apart from Evolution SLT®, we found a high
N. Daratsianos et al. 9

Figure 4. Boxplots presenting the mean total torque play (degrees) and the standard deviation (in error bars) at the intercept of the trendline with the x-axis. The
total torque play was calculated by adding the absolute angular values, both positive and negative, for each of the data series.

Table 4. The average widths of the bracket slots before and after Limitations
each experiment. We considered the play between a single-rotated bracket and the wire
using a simplified experimental protocol. Depending on the clinical
Average
widen- situation, the play of the wire in neighbouring brackets should be
Slot width Slot width ing of taken into consideration as well. On the other hand, if three brackets
before (mm) SD before after (mm) SD after the slot were used and all had different slot sizes due to manufacture incon-
sistency, the corresponding graphs would be more difficult to inter-
Hiro 0.469 0.010 0.472 0.011 0.002 pret. The torque play as measured in this study should not be given
Incognito™ 0.460 0.002 0.463 0.003 0.003 too much attention by the clinician. The effective torque play, i.e. the
Joy® >0.498 >0.498
bracket angulation at specified moment values, when twisting the
Kurz 7th 0.473 0.002 0.476 0.003 0.004
wire beyond slot engagement, could be clinically more important.
generation
STb™ 0.471 0.002 0.477 0.005 0.006 Evolution SLT® has only two complete walls (Supplementary
Evolution <0.452 <0.452 Figure 3), the third wall is partial and the wires could not full
SLT® engage with opened clip in contrast to the other self-ligating
In-Ovation® 0.469 0.001 0.470 0.001 0.001 bracket-type, In-Ovation® L MTM. Probably due to the elastic-
L MTM ity of the clip and the friction, the angle of engagement and the
torque behaviour of Evolution SLT® was different, depending on
The slots of Joy® and Evolution SLT® could not be measured, because they whether the clip was being pressed opened from the twisted wire
exceeded the range of the available gauges (0.452–0.498 mm, equivalent to (activation) or being closed onto it (deactivation) (Figure 2d). Only
0.0178–0.0196″). The brackets are prescribed to have a width of 0.018″ which the activation part of the curves (from 0 degree to +20 degrees and
is equivalent to 0.4572 mm. from 0 degree to −20 degrees) without averaging was used. This
may suggest a limitation of the method considering that in some
variability of torque play (5.5–13.5 degrees) in the tests with the clinical cases the wire is not fixed in the zero torque position but
nominal wire SS 0.018″ × 0.025″ (Table 2). is already third-order activated before the clip of the bracket is
10
closed. Differently shaped activation-deactivation curves have been
shown in other studies with self-ligating brackets too (13,14) and
are fundamentally different from the plots of standard brackets
with nearly congruent linear parts in activation and deactivation
(11). Additionally, the Evolution SLT® slot for frontal brackets is
designed specifically for a lingual (curved) arch form to enable a
close fit and produce torque. Using a straight wire, like in this study,
reduces the intimate fit between slot and archwire and makes the
clip exclusively control the torque in contrast to all other brackets
which express torque by the ligation mechanism and the engage-
ment in the slot walls. The linear end part of the plots represents
for Evolution SLT® the effect of the active clip, and for all other
brackets, the slot engagement. The applied method must be judged
as unsuitable for comparing brackets without three complete slot
walls with others, since different qualities are compared—ligation
mechanism versus slot dimensions.
The narrowest (usually the deepest) part of the slot was measured
with the round profile pins. As the greatest deformation is expected in
the higher parts of the slot near the wings, this method cannot precisely
register bracket wing deformation. Furthermore, the pin gauges are very
small and minor deformation (e.g. because of improper handling) can
result in false values. Furthermore, two of the seven brackets exceeded
the diameter of the available gauges and couldn’t be measured.
Conclusion
All brackets showed a differing slot size from the nominal 0.018″
and even the most slot-filling wire TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″ presented
torque play in all tested slots (except Evolution SLT®), although
declared to be oversized. Incognito™ showed the most precise slot
and Joy® the widest slot with the highest torque play. SS 0.016″ ×
0.022″ and SS 0.016″ × 0.024″ showed similar poor torque control,
indicating that they should be customized to retain the torque of the
front teeth in the retraction phase. The finishing wire TMA 0.0175″
× 0.0175″ exhibited the highest torque play among the TMA wires,
indicating that it is rather unsuitable for finishing without cus-
tomization. TMA 0.0182″ × 0.0182″ and TMA 0.0182″ × 0.025″
showed similar minimal torque play; the latter is beneficial only in
special situations when higher torquing moments are needed. All
measured brackets presented a tendency for minor—clinically prob-
ably neglectable—deformation after torque application.
The manufacturers could profit from this investigation and
optimize the dimensional precision of their products. Even though
all measured lingual brackets (Joy® and Evolution SLT® could
not be measured) fulfilled the precision requirements of E DIN
13996:2010-03 (29), we suggest defining narrower precision ranges
in standards, as we found a high variability of torque play (5.5–13.5
degrees) in the tests with the nominal wire SS 0.018″ × 0.025″.
Clinicians must be aware of the torque play of each wire-bracket
combination to be able to plan the treatment adequately. At the same
time, they must consider meticulously the anatomical limitations,
since low torque play appliances can precisely realize the planned
tooth movement. Therefore, an individual setup as visual treatment
objective is necessary and must be controlled with caution not only
by the dental technician, but also by the orthodontist himself.
Supplementary material
Supplementary material is available at European Journal of
Orthodontics online.
European Journal of Orthodontics, 2015
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the companies (Medics XXI, Spain/TOP-Service für
Lingualtechnik, 3M Unitek Corporation, Bad Essen, Germany/Adenta GmbH,
Gilching, Germany/Ormco Corporation, Orange, CA, USA/Dentsply GAC
International Bohemia, New York, USA/Dental Devices and Supplies Ltd,
Leicestershire, UK) for providing the necessary materials. We would like to
thank Prof Dirk Wiechmann for supporting this study.
References
1. Serway, R.A. and Jewett, J.W. (2003) Physics for Scientists and Engineers.
6th ed. Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA.
2. Rauch, E.D. (1959) Torque and its application to orthodontics. American
Journal of Orthodontics, 45, 817–830.
3. Gioka, C. and Eliades, T. (2004) Materials-induced variation in the torque
expression of preadjusted appliances. American Journal of Orthodontics
and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 125, 323–328.
4. Sebanc, J., Brantley, W.A., Pincsak, J.J. and Conover, J.P. (1984) Variability
of effective root torque as a function of edge bevel on orthodontic arch
wires. American Journal of Orthodontics, 86, 43–51.
5. Badawi, H.M., Toogood, R.W., Carey, J.P., Heo, G. and Major, P.W. (2008)
Torque expression of self-ligating brackets. American Journal of Ortho-
dontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 133, 721–728.
6. Creekmore, T. (1989) Lingual orthodontics--its renaissance. American
Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 96, 120–137.
7. Stamm, T., Wiechmann, D., Heinecken, A. and Ehmer, U. (2000) Relation
between second and third order problems in lingual orthodontic treat-
ment. Journal of Lingual Orthodontics, 1, 5–11.
8. Plietsch, R., Bourauel, C., Drescher, D. and Nellen, B. (1994) A computer-
controlled flexing test for determining the elastic parameters of highly flex-
ible orthodontic wires. Fortschr Kieferorthop, 55, 84–95.
9. Daratsianos, N. (2010) Master Thesis: Biomechanical analysis of torque
capabilities of lingual brackets. Department of Orthodontics. Hannover
Medical School, Hannover.
10. Taylor, J.R. (1997) An Introduction to Error Analysis: The Study of Uncer-
tainties in Physical Measurements, 2nd edn. University Science Books, Sau-
salita, CA.
11. Meling, T.R., Odegaard, J. and Meling, E.O. (1997) On mechanical prop-
erties of square and rectangular stainless steel wires tested in torsion.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 111,
310–320.
12. Demling, A., Dittmer, M.P. and Schwestka-Polly, R. (2009) Comparative
analysis of slot dimension in lingual bracket systems. Head & Face Medi-
cine, 5, 27.
13. Major, T.W., Carey, J.P., Nobes, D.S., Heo, G. and Major, PW. (2011)
Measurement of plastic and elastic deformation due to third-order torque
in self-ligated orthodontic brackets. American Association of Orthodon-
tists, 140, 326–339. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.024
14. Major, T.W., Carey, J.P., Nobes, D.S., Heo, G. and Major, P.W. (2011)
Mechanical effects of third-order movement in self-ligated brackets by the
measurement of torque expression. American Association of Orthodon-
tists,139, e31–e44. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.04.029
15. Huang, Y. et al.et al. (2009) Numeric modeling of torque capabilities of
self-ligating and conventional brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics
and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136, 638–643.
16. Odegaard, J., Meling, T. and Meling, E. (1994) An evaluation of the torsional
moments developed in orthodontic applications. An in vitro study. American
Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 105, 392–400.
17. Al Fakir, H., Carey, J.P., Melenka, G.W., Nobes, D.S., Heo, G. and Major,
P.W. (2014) Investigation into the effects of stainless steel ligature ties on
the mechanical characteristics of conventional and self-ligated brackets
subjected to torque. Journal of Orthodontics, 41, 188–200.
18. De Genova, D.C., McInnes-Ledoux, P., Weinberg, R. and Shaye, R. (1985)
Force degradation of orthodontic elastomeric chains--a product compari-
son study. American Journal of Orthodontics, 87, 377–384.
N. Daratsianos et al.
19. Lu, T.C., Wang, W.N., Tarng, T.H. and Chen, J.W. (1993) Force decay of
elastomeric chain--a serial study. Part II. American Journal of Orthodon-
tics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 104, 373–377.
20. Stevenson, J.S. and Kusy, R.P. (1994) Force application and decay char-
acteristics of untreated and treated polyurethane elastomeric chains. The
Angle Orthodontist, 64, 455–457.
21. Taloumis, L.J., Smith, T.M., Hondrum, S.O. and Lorton, L. (1997) Force
decay and deformation of orthodontic elastomeric ligatures. American
Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 111, 1–11.
22. Fischer-Brandies, H., Orthuber, W., Es-Souni, M. and Meyer, S. (2000)
Torque transmission between square wire and bracket as a function of
measurement, form and hardness parameters. Journal of Orofacial Ortho-
pedics, 61, 258–265.
23. Archambault, A., Lacoursiere, R., Badawi, H., Major, P.W., Carey, J. and
Flores-Mir, C. (2010) Torque expression in stainless steel orthodontic
brackets. A systematic review. The Angle Orthodontist, 80, 201–210.
24. Hixson, M.E., Brantley, W.A., Pincsak, J.J. and Conover, J.P. (1982)
Changes in bracket slot tolerance following recycling of direct-bond
11
metallic orthodontic appliances. American Journal of Orthodontist, 81,
447–454.
25. Lossdörfer, S., Schwestka-Polly, R. and Wiechmann, D. (2013) Control of
lower incisor inclination with a completely customized lingual appliance
for dentoalveolar compensation of class III malocclusion. Journal of Oro-
facial Orthopedics, 74, 381–396.
26. Wiechmann, D., Schwestka-Polly, R., Pancherz, H. and Hohoff, A.
(2010) Control of mandibular incisors with the combined Herbst and
completely customized lingual appliance - a pilot study. Head & Face
Medicine, 6, 3.
27. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2005) ISO/
TC 106/SC 1 N 153: ISO/WD Dentistry—Orthodontic Brackets and
Tubes.
28. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2006) EN ISO
15841:2006: Dentistry—Wires for use in orthodontics.
29. Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V. (DIN). (2010) E DIN 13996:2010-
03: Dentistry-Dimensions for wires and brackets for orthodontic appli-
ances.