Lingual Brackets Research Articles

The Mechanical and Clinical Properties of Customized Orthodontic Bracket Systems-A Comprehensive Review.

The rise of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and 3D printing technologies in orthodontics has revolutionized the development of customized labial and lingual bracket systems with a variety of materials, which offer potential advantages over traditional orthodontic brackets. To highlight the current state of knowledge regarding the mechanical and clinical properties of CAD/CAM and 3D-printed custom bracket systems, we conducted a comprehensive search across the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus databases to identify relevant articles published before April 2024. Mechanical (including fracture toughness, hardness, modulus of elasticity, frictional resistance, slot accuracy, torque transmission, and shear bond strength) and clinical (including treatment efficiency and duration, cost, and comfort) properties were compared between traditional and customized orthodontic bracket systems in the current review. Our findings suggest that customized brackets have the potential to increase bracket slot precision, reduce treatment time, and offer cost-efficiency. However, it is worth noting that the advantages and disadvantages of customized bracket systems vary depending on the bracket material and the manufacturing methods, warranting comprehensively controlled investigations in the future.

Numerical Simulation of Maxillary Anterior Teeth Retraction Utilizing Power Arms in Lingual Orthodontic Technique.

It was the scope of this study to explore the biomechanical implications of retraction force application point modifications in lingual orthodontics, aiming to mitigate the bowing effect and enhance anchorage stability in the anterior teeth. Using the FE method on an idealized maxillary model, en masse retraction was simulated using a modified lingual fixed appliance including edgewise lingual brackets, a 0.017″ × 0.025″ mushroom-shaped archwire, and power arms between lateral incisors and canines, with a transpalatal arch (TPA) connecting the first molars. Applying bilateral retraction forces of 1.5 N at twelve positions, initial tooth displacements during space closure were evaluated. Shifting power arms gingivally did not effectively counteract palatal tipping of incisors but reduced posterior and palatal tipping of canines with a power arm length of 11.3 mm preventing posterior tipping. Apically displacing the TPA retraction force increased mesiobuccal rotation while preventing mesial molar tipping for retraction forces applied 12.6 mm from the archwire. Apically shifting retraction forces can mitigate vertical bowing effects in lingual orthodontics, yet it also highlights the challenges in maintaining torque in the anterior teeth. Further research and clinical validation are essential in order to confirm these results, emphasizing the complexity and need for advanced biomechanical strategies in personalized lingual orthodontic treatments.

Evaluation of dimensional accuracy and surface roughness of lingual bracket slot –An in vitro study

The paradigm shift with the increasing number of adults and teens seeking aesthetic options for orthodontic treatment led to the increased demand for lingual orthodontics. When it comes to size and slot dimensions, lingual brackets are very different from labial brackets.With the rise of lingual orthodontics in our everyday practice, it's more critical than ever for practitioners to understand these potential bracket size variations. The resistance to sliding mechanics can occur if the contact angle between the archwire and bracket increases, this creates the need for precise bracket slot dimension. The amount of friction varies proportionally to the accuracy of the dimensions and the roughness of the bracket slot.To evaluate the precision of commercially available orthodontic lingual bracket slots in inch dimensions with manufacturers’ published dimensions using a stereomicroscope and to compare the surface roughness of commercially available orthodontic lingual bracket slots using an atomic force microscope.Lingual brackets from four different manufacturers were taken for evaluation of slot dimensions. Twenty brackets of each manufacturer were randomly selected. Trinocular Stemi 2000 Stereo Zoom Microscope with Digital Camera (Carl Zeiss, Germany) was used for measurement of bracket slot dimensions. An atomic Force Microscope (AFM) (Nanoscope® IV Di digital instrument, California, USA) was used to evaluate the surface roughness of lingual bracket slots. Comparison of dimensions between mesial processes and comparison of dimensions between distal processes showed that the difference was only marginal with no significant statistic value. Statistically significant results proved that slot dimensions were not precise as per the manufacturer’s standards for given lingual brackets and were oversized for all bracket systems. Statistically insignificant results showed that the bracket systems were similar concerning the surface roughness of the bracket.The analyzed series of lingual bracket systems exhibited significant differences with manufacturers’ standards in slot dimension, which will clinically result in torque play. Lack of standardization of slot dimensions during the manufacturing process may be clinically associated with undesirable tooth positioning and movement; inferring that the bracket systems were similar concerning the surface roughness of the bracket slot.

Modified single rigid vacuum-formed indirect bonding trays for lingual bracket application: a case report

Abstract Lingual orthodontic treatment offers an aesthetic alternative but presents unique challenges in bracket positioning. The present article introduces a modified design and fabrication process for rigid vacuum-formed indirect bonding trays for lingual bracket application. The technique is presented through a clinical case report of an adult patient who presented with bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and managed using lingual appliances, premolar extractions, and mini-screws. The modified rigid vacuum-formed trays enabled the accurate simultaneous bonding of multiple teeth as well as individual teeth. The technique offers several advantages over existing indirect bonding methods, including time-saving, simplicity, easy removal of excessive adhesive, and potential cost-effectiveness. The superimposition of post-bonding scans and the digital orthodontic setup showed high agreement between the planned and actual bracket positions. Additionally, the close alignment between the planned orthodontic setup and the achieved treatment outcome highlights the reliability of the technique for predictable lingual orthodontic treatment. Further clinical studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm the effectiveness of this technique.

A Comparative Evaluation of Frictional Resistance of Various Lingual Brackets With Nitinol (NiTi) Archwires of Different Dimensions: An In Vitro Study.

Introduction Orthodontic mechanics involves transferring some of the applied force to the tooth's supporting components via friction, which in turn allows the tooth to move more easily. Aim The purpose of this in vitro experiment was to examine the frictional resistance (FR) of different lingual brackets utilizing Instron universal testing machines and nitinol (NiTi) archwires of varying sizes. Materials and methods Twenty-four sectional anterior die stones were replicated from a study model. They were categorized into eight categories, with the Libral lingual bracket and the JJ lingual bracket having 0.012" and 0.014" inch NiTi archwire, which were further subdivided into six subgroups. Three brackets were bonded to the anterior teeth of the upper and lower segments and replicated on other models with the help of silicon putty. Elastomeric modules were ligated to two diameters of NiTi wire (0.012" and 0.014") in each model. An Instron universal testing machine was used to measure the frictional force. Numerical data and descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation have been shown. Results In the overall analysis, it was observed that among JJ Orthodontics samples using 0.012" NiTi archwires, the maxilla exhibited a higher FR (4.205N) compared to the mandible (4.092N). Similarly, in the case of Libral Orthodontics samples with 0.012" NiTi archwires, the maxilla also demonstrated a higher FR (5.10N) than the mandible (4.97N). However, this trend did not hold for samples using 0.014" NiTi archwires. There was a statistically nonsignificant difference (p > 0.05) in the values between all the pairs of groups. Conclusion The present study concludes that Libral lingual brackets produced overall more FR than JJ lingual brackets.

The Impact of Lingual Orthodontics on Gingival and Periodontal Health; A Systematic Review of Controlled Clinical Trial Studies.

Linguistic orthodontics is a highly successful and visually pleasing treatment method for addressing malocclusions. It possesses a multitude of advantages in addition to potential disadvantages, including speech impairments, mastication restrictions, and oral agitation. Lingual braces can cause gingival hyperplasia and impact the health of the gums and periodontal tissues. This study conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA standards, specifically examining lingual orthodontic treatments that were the subject of randomized controlled trials. The study found that lingual brackets are more advantageous than buccal brackets for flat surfaces. Both types of brackets have been found to be associated with an elevation in plaque retention, gingival irritation, and S. mutans count. Because of an increased demand for adult orthodontic care, there are designed discrete treatment options such as lingual bracket systems. The demand is largely driven by appearance and cosmetics. Apparently, lingual brackets proved to be more efficacious for the prevention of caries on flat surfaces. Additional research is necessary to gain a comprehensive understanding of lingual orthodontic efficacy and safety compared to its counterpart

Hybrid Orthodontics for Aesthetic Deep Bite Correction—Case Series and General Clinical Considerations

Background: A range of psychosocial and aesthetic factors motivate patients to undergo orthodontic treatment. The appliance choice depends not only on the type of malocclusion, but also on the aesthetic and functional demands of the patients themselves. Nowadays, digital planning enables the manufacture of individualised and customised orthodontic appliances. However, the predictability of movements with aligner treatment has long been under discussion. This article illustrates, through a series of case reports, how a hybrid approach combining individualised aesthetic orthodontic appliances can improve the predictability of tooth movements, thereby providing additional tools for clinicians charged with choosing the best indicated and biomechanically advantageous technique. To this end, three patients with different malocclusions were treated via a hybrid approach involving clear aligners in the upper arch followed by lingual fixed appliances in the upper and lower arches. All patients were treated using ALIAS lingual PSL 0.018 × 0.018-inch slot brackets and in-house 3D-printed aligners. Findings: The hybrid approach combining aligners and fixed lingual appliances led to the successful resolution of all three complex cases in the series without prolonging treatment time. The superimpositions demonstrate the predictability of even traditionally difficult movements. In particular, the Alias PSL lingual system, used from the beginning, enabled good control of both the torque and inclination of the lower incisors. Conclusions: Combining clear aligners and fixed lingual appliances provides a highly efficient means of treating malocclusions aesthetically. In our cases, the aligners offset the lack of bite-plate effect from the lingual brackets and appliances, providing advantageous biomechanics for rotation correction and control of tip, torque and root movements. Understanding how to exploit the strengths of each appliance enables the clinician to treat adult patients efficaciously, efficiently and aesthetically.

Biofilm volume and acidification within initial biofilms formed in situ on buccally and palatally exposed bracket material.

Acidification by bacterial biofilms at the bracket/tooth interface is one of the most common problems in fixed orthodontic treatments, which can lead to white spot lesions (WSL) and caries. As lingual brackets were shown to exhibit reduced WSL formation clinically, the aim of this in situ study was to compare initial intraoral biofilm formation and acidification on bracket-like specimens placed buccally and palatally in the upper jaw as apossible cause for this observation. Intraoral biofilm was collected from splints equipped with buccally and palatally exposed test specimens, which were worn by 12volunteers for atotal of 48 h. The test specimens consisted of standard bracket material cylinders on top of ahydroxyapatite disc to represent the bracket/tooth interface. They were analyzed for three-dimensional biofilm volume and live/dead distribution by fluorescence staining and confocal laser scanning microscopy as well as for acidification by fluorescence-based pH ratiometry. Similar general biofilm morphology with regard to volume and viability could be detected for buccally and palatally exposed specimens. For pH values, biofilms from both positions showed increased acidification at the bottom layer. Interestingly, the pH value at the top layers of the biofilms was slightly lower on palatally than on buccally exposed specimens, which may likely be due to anatomic conditions. Based on the results of this study, initial intraoral biofilm formation and acidification is almost similar on the bracket material/biomimetic tooth interface when placed buccally or palatally in the upper jaw. As lingual brackets were shown to exhibit reduced WSL formation clinically, future studies should investigate further factors like bracket geometry.

Percentage of patients shifting to another treatment modality: An experience-guided decision.

This study aimed to assess the frequency with which orthodontic patients decided to shift to another type of orthodontic appliance, among conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner, based on their personal experiences of pain, ulcers, bad breath, hygiene issues and social difficulties. This study comprises of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. The sample (n = 500; age group = 19-25 years) was divided equally into four groups based on the treatment modality: conventional metal brackets, ceramic brackets, lingual brackets and clear aligner. Patients rated the questionnaire using a visual analogue scale, to assess variables (such as pain, ulcer etc) that impact various treatment modalities. Subsequently, patients from all groups provided feedback regarding their treatment experiences, and expressed their preference for an alternative modality. Intergroup comparison among the four groups was done using one-way analysis of variance with Tukey's HSD post-hoc test (p ≤ 0.05). Patients who received lingual brackets reported higher levels of pain and ulceration, as compared to those who received clear aligners. All four groups showed statistically significant differences for ulcers during treatment (p ≤ 0.05). Of the 125 patients who received conventional metal brackets, 28% expressed a preference for clear aligner therapy, while 20% preferred ceramic brackets. In the lingual group, 56% of 125 patients preferred clear aligner therapy, and 8% preferred ceramic brackets to complete their treatment. In the ceramic group, 83% did not want to switch, whereas 17% desired to switch to clear aligner, while in aligner group no patient desired to switch. A higher percentage of patients from lingual brackets group chose to shift to clear aligners, followed by conventional metal brackets group and by ceramic brackets group, in this descending order. The clear aligner group demonstrated fewer issues than the other treatment modalities.

Invisible Orthodontics: Ceramic appliance vs Lingual appliance -A patient perception survey

The aim of the study was to analyse variations in patients’ perception on oral health, aesthetic acceptance, pain perceptions and comfort levels in patients who has undergone/undergoing orthodontic treatment by means of two types of invisible orthodontic appliances: fixed lingual metal brackets and fixed buccal aesthetic/ceramic brackets. A comparative survey to assess the patient perception after their initial levelling alignment phase was created via Google form and sent to 25 ceramic labially treated and 25 lingually treated patient. Comfort level, pain perception, speech impediment ,quality of life in patients was significantly better in Ceramic brackets as compared to lingual (p=0.001),Aesthetic perception was significantly higher impact on ceramic (p=0.001) as 72% reported no impact on aesthetics with lingual brackets as compared to 4% in the ceramic brackets. Oral hygiene maintenance: The difference on impact of Oral hygiene maintenance was statistically non- significant between ceramic brackets and lingual brackets (p=0.238).Difficulty while having food was statistically non- significantly between ceramic brackets and lingual brackets.(p=0.448). Patients prefer lingual treatment cause of their esthetic nature and their expectations are higher with lingual treatment which itself is not favorable from a clinicians perspective and it is worth noting that speech disturbances may lead to greater social embarrassment than more or less invisible ceramic brackets.

Has the COVID-19 Pandemic Affected Orthodontists' Interest in Various Orthodontic Appliances?

To determine the changes in orthodontists' interest in various orthodontic appliances during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A questionnaire probing respondents' interest in orthodontic appliances and techniques, including standard buccal metal brackets, self-ligating brackets, standard ceramic brackets, lingual brackets, clear aligners, orthodontic facemasks, removable functional appliances, fixed functional appliances, orthognathic surgery, orthodontic miniscrews, and lingual retainers, was prepared using Google Forms and then sent to the Turkish Orthodontic Society to invite all members of the society to participate in the survey. Of the 1903 members invited, 230 (response rate, 12.08%) orthodontists completed the questionnaire. The respondents' interest in brackets did not change among 70% of the respondents (standard buccal metal bracket 80%, self-ligating bracket 72.2%, standard ceramic bracket 77%, and lingual bracket 76.5%). A significant difference was observed between the genders only about the interest in standard metal brackets and fixed functional appliances (p<0.05 for both). Interest in standard metal brackets decreased as respondents' work experience increased (p<0.05). The interest in self-ligating brackets was higher among respondents with 1-5 years of experience than among other respondents (p<0.05). Interest in self-ligating brackets increased more among lecturers and residents than among clinicians (p<0.05). The interest of orthodontists in clear aligners showed the highest increase during the COVID-19 pandemic among all orthodontic appliances, whereas their interest in other appliances, particularly standard buccal metal brackets, did not change.

Lingual bracket transfer accuracy of double vacuum-formed indirect bonding tray using 3D-printed model: an in vivo study

This study aimed to assess the transfer accuracy of a digital indirect bonding method for lingual brackets using double vacuum-formed trays invivo. Twenty-five patients in need of lingual orthodontic treatment were consecutively recruited. Bracket placement was performed on ideal setups, followed by fabricating indirect bonding trays through vacuum-forming on 3-dimensional printed models. Transfer accuracy was measured at each bracket after superimpositions of postbonding scans and reference data. One-tailed t tests were used to determine whether bracket deviations were within the limit of 0.5 mm and 2° for linear and angular dimensions, respectively. A total of 611 lingual brackets were evaluated. Mean linear transfer errors were 0.06 mm, 0.09 mm, and 0.12 mm, with frequencies of deviations within the 0.5 mm limit of 99.7%, 99.8%, and 98.0% for mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions, respectively. Regarding angular measurements, mean transfer errors were 1.28°, 1.73°, and 2.96°, with frequencies of deviations within the 2° limit of 81.0%, 68.9%, and 51.1% for rotation, tip, and torque, respectively. Mean errors fell within the clinically accepted limits for all linear dimensions and rotation but exceeded the limit for tip and torque. Lingual bracket indirect bonding using double vacuum-formed trays fabricated on 3-dimensional printed models has high transfer accuracy in the mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions and rotation. However, the transfer of tip and torque is less accurate.

A Review on Orthodontic Brackets and Their Application in Clinical Orthodontics.

Braces are undoubtedly a blessing for those whose teeth are misaligned in various ways, yet many people may not enjoy the traditional metal braces. However, some people are totally fine with having their teeth fused with the set of metal brackets and various metal components flowing through. A few people may simply not feel comfortable in that way. Orthodontists have developed a huge array of bracket styles by concentrating on the wide range of preferences and financial constraints that their patients present. These various dental bracket types are all advantageous from one point of view or another. Orthodontic supplies and materials are being produced using technology that is advancing exponentially. Every day, more technologies, processes, and designs emerge. These tools assist the orthodontist in providing patients with the best functional and cosmetic outcomes. Since Edward Hartley Angle's time through MBT brackets and then lingual brackets, orthodontic brackets have advanced significantly. Orthodontists' lives have been greatly facilitated by these brackets. Numerous new materials and designs will be developed as technology progresses. The purpose of this article was to give a general overview of the different orthodontic brackets and demonstrate how the logic underlying them helps orthodontists in their day-to-day jobs.

Stresses Along the Root Surfaces of Maxillary Anterior Dentition During Retraction in Labial and Lingual Mechanics with Varying Level of Bone Support: A Finite Element Study

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the stress along the root surfaces of anterior maxillary dentition during retraction in labial and lingual mechanics with varying level of bone support. Materials and methods Eight 3D finite element models (FEM) having 340,215 nodes and 211,543 elements were created with normal periodontium and different levels of alveolar bone loss; four with labial brackets and four with lingual brackets. Sliding mechanics were simulated as en masse retraction of the anterior dentition. The equivalent stresses along the roots of six anterior maxillary teeth were measured in all the models. Results Equivalent stresses in pascals (Pa) generated at the root surfaces of central incisors are always higher in labial technique (right: 4.6013 × 10−2; left: 7.1158 × 10−2) and of canines (right: 10.003 × 10−2; left: 16.789 × 10−2) are always higher in lingual technique. Conclusion In labial technique, central incisor roots are experiencing maximum stress, which might be the explanation of commonly seen higher incidence of root resorption in them during en masse retraction. In lingual technique, canine roots are experiencing higher stresses as compared to other anterior teeth during en masse retraction. Equivalent stresses generated at the root surfaces of canines are more irrespective of the alveolar bone loss in lingual technique.

The use of lingual brackets and miniscrews as anchorage in orthodontic treatment in patients with a high-angle skeletal Class II relationship

The use of lingual brackets and miniscrews as anchorage in orthodontic treatment in patients with a high-angle skeletal Class II relationship

Lever arm on bracket vs. lever arm on archwire: A 3D finite element method study of mechanics of miniscrew-supported lingual en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth

To compare the deformation of the main archwire and 3D movements of maxillary anterior teeth during miniscrew-supported en-masse retraction with the lever arm on the archwire and on the brackets in lingual orthodontic treatment in finite element analysis (FEM) simulation. A 3D dental-alveolar model with bonded 0.018×0.025-inch slot lingual brackets and a 0.017×0.025-inch dimension stainless-steel archwire was created. Four FEM models were created based on a 3D dental-alveolar model: in Models A and C, the lever arms were attached to the lingual bracket, while in Models B and D, the lever arms were attached to the archwire. Meanwhile, in Models A and B, the miniscrews were placed in between the molars, while in Models C and D, the miniscrews were positioned on the palatal roof. After a 1.5N retraction force was applied from the miniscrew to the end of the lever arm, the initial movements in the sagittal, transversal, and vertical planes were recorded and analysed for maxillary anterior teeth. In Models B and D, smaller deformation of the main archwire and less prominent bowing effect were noticed in both sagittal and vertical directions compared to their counter groups. In Models C and D, the central incisors showed less torque loss in the sagittal direction and more canine intrusion vertically. For the same lever arm-miniscrew retraction configuration, the lever arm on the bracket showed less deformation of the main archwire and more body movement of the teeth than the lever arm on the archwire group. With the same level arm height, the transverse and vertical bowing effect is reduced when the lever arm was placed distal to the central incisor and the miniscrews placed next to the palatal suture.

Digital workflows for 3D-printed customised double-slotted lingual appliances: a case report

Abstract With the advancement of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology, orthodontists are able to design and manufacture customised lingual appliances, which may increase treatment versatility and reduce treatment costs. The present article describes the digital workflows associated with the design and manufacture of customised double-slotted lingual brackets and arch wires. Also demonstrated is the technique’s efficiency through a non-extraction case report. An adult patient with moderate crowding in both arches was successfully treated using 3D-printed customised double-slotted lingual appliances combined with miniscrews and interproximal reduction. The moderate crowding was addressed without incisor proclination despite the non-extraction strategy.

Lingual ve Labial Sabit Ortodontik Aygıtların Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması: Retrospektif Çalışma

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the effects of lingual and labial orthodontic appliances on patient comfort and daily life.&#x0D; Materials and Methods: A total of 30 patients, according to appliance type, two groups were considered. Lingual brackets were used with respect to total of 15 patients including 9 girls and 6 boys for Group 1 and labial brackets were taken into account for 15 patients with 8 girls and 7 boys for Group 2. Questionnaire forms filled in the T0(1st day), T1(7th day) and T2(14th day) periods of all patients were evaluated. Parameters related to pain level, speech difficulty, tongue trauma, eating difficulty, brushing difficulty, time to first notice of aligning in teeth, social environment reaction, treatment satisfaction and necessity of treatment were examined according to the values marked on a scale from 1 to 10 in the questionnaire forms. Statistical analyzes were performed with one-way Anova, Welch's t-test and paired-sample t-test.&#x0D; Results: While there was no significant difference in pain level and brushing difficulty in T0 between the groups(p&gt; 0.05), speech difficulties, tongue trauma and eating difficulties were significantly higher in Group 1 than Group 2(p&lt; 0.05). Significant decrease were observed in pain level, and difficulty in speaking, eating and brushing at T0-T1, T0-T2 and T1-T2 periods(p&lt; 0.05).&#x0D; Conclusion: Lingual brackets caused more speech, tongue trauma and eating difficulties, especially in the first days of treatment. It was observed that the discomforts caused by both appliances were decreased over time.

Evaluation of Orthodontic Treatment Method Preferences of Dentistry Students, Dentists and Orthodontic Residents.

The aim of this study was to evaluate orthodontic treatment method preferences among dentistry students, dentists and orthodontic residents taking into account factors such as esthetics, advantage/disadvantage, cost and treatment duration. The study was carried out on three groups: dentistry students (n=318), dentists (n=110) and orthodontic residents (n=98), and a 17-question survey was applied. Questionnaire forms included informational photos of conventional metal brackets (CMB), esthetic ceramic brackets (ECB), self-ligating brackets (SLB), clear aligner (CA), and lingual brackets (LB). The participants' preferences for orthodontic treatment methods were evaluated using chi-square analysis, not only between groups but also considering gender and income level. Regarding esthetics, dentists (41%) and orthodontic residents (78%) mostly preferred CA, while dentistry students mostly preferred LB (44%). With regard to advantage/disadvantage, dentistry students (31%) and dentists (39%) mostly preferred SLB, while orthodontic residents mostly preferred CA (55%). Regarding the success of the treatment, all three groups mostly preferred CMB. (respectively 50%; 47%; 72%). While CA was mostly preferred for short-term treatments in all three groups (respectively 40%; 71%; 88%), CMB was mostly preferred for long-term treatments (respectively 35%, 51%, 55%). Gender and income-level differences had little effect on orthodontic treatment method preferences. Except for long-term treatments and treatment success, there was generally great interest in CA, especially among orthodontic residents. Ceramic brackets and LB were generally the least preferred treatment methods among dentistry students, dentists, and orthodontic residents.

In-office indirect lingual bracket positioning and lingual straight archwire forming: A clinical technique

In-office indirect lingual bracket positioning and lingual straight archwire forming: A clinical technique