Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I'd like to thank the editor for the privilege to review the manuscript, and also thank the authors for their efforts performing and presenting this study. The authors proposed a novel technique aiming to improve force distribution to distalize molars more efficiently by using open coil springs and an anchor screw, and  conducted a finite element analysis to assess efficiency of the proposed technique. The study is well presented and it is of clinical significance.   However, there are some concerns need to be clarified further. 

1. A major concern is that in the conventional distalization technique, the applied external force to the canine or the premolar will produce a mechanical (physical) displacement of the canine or the premolar immediately. As the teeth are closely contacted through the enamal surfaces, which could be regarded as the direct rigid contact, is it possible that the canine, premolars and molars could be regarded as one, and the 4N force would be transmitted through the rigid tooth-tooth contact and distributed to each tooth evenly regardless of the periodontal response at the very initial stage? If not, please explain; If so, the construction of the the finite element model would be reconsidered.

2. The meaning of the arrows and the different directions of the arrows in Fig.7 should be further clarified. 

3. In lines 120-122, the statement should be the opposite, as the technique with coil spring  is  prosposed as the noval one.

Author Response

We appreciate your kind review and have editted the manuscripts according to your suggestions. The followings are our comments in red color.

1. A major concern is that in the conventional distalization technique, the applied external force to the canine or the premolar will produce a mechanical (physical) displacement of the canine or the premolar immediately. As the teeth are closely contacted through the enamal surfaces, which could be regarded as the direct rigid contact, is it possible that the canine, premolars and molars could be regarded as one, and the 4N force would be transmitted through the rigid tooth-tooth contact and distributed to each tooth evenly regardless of the periodontal response at the very initial stage? If not, please explain; If so, the construction of the the finite element model would be reconsidered.

There is difference in mechanicis between regid connection like dental bridge and tight contact. We added explaination of this point to the manuscript 

2. The meaning of the arrows and the different directions of the arrows in Fig.7 should be further clarified. 

Thank you for your advice. We added explanation to the manuscript so that readers can understand the meaning of the arrows easily.

3. In lines 120-122, the statement should be the opposite, as the technique with coil spring  is  prosposed as the noval one.

Than you for pointing it out. We fixed the issue.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is a very interesting manuscript which describes finite element modelling of an efficient distalization technique using open coils for an improved force distribution, with reduced stress concentration. The manuscript is recommended for publication in “Applied Sciences” journal after considering the following minor points.

-        In the abstract – line 18, PDL is used for the first time, hence provide the full form periodontal ligament (PDL)

-        Introduction section provides adequate description on the common distalization techniques, problems associated with it and the role of the proposed technique in confronting these limitations.

-        Figure 2 caption is wrongly provided as Figure 1.

-        Figure 4 caption, it is suggested to provide the full form of CR for an easy understanding

-        In Fig 8, line 167,  NoSp is wrongly provided in the image as NpSp.

-        Line 167- sentence starting with “The amounts of distalization” is confusing- kindly rephrase

Author Response

We appreciate your kind review and have editted the manuscripts according to your suggestions. The followings are our comments in red color.

-        In the abstract – line 18, PDL is used for the first time, hence provide the full form periodontal ligament (PDL)

-        Figure 2 caption is wrongly provided as Figure 1.

-        Figure 4 caption, it is suggested to provide the full form of CR for an easy understanding

-        In Fig 8, line 167,  NoSp is wrongly provided in the image as NpSp.

Thank you for pointing it out. We fixed these issues in the manuscript.

 

-        Line 167- sentence starting with “The amounts of distalization” is confusing- kindly rephrase

Thank you for your advice. We replace it with a simpler expression.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed the concerns and revised the manuscript accordingly.