Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 00:18:14 -0500
From: "ESCO automatic digest system" <LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU>
Subject: ESCO Digest - 18 Oct 2006 to 20 Oct 2006 (#2006-36)

There are 5 messages totalling 992 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:
1. End cutters
2. Photo bond primer
3. OrthoClear's death
4. Indirect bonding & RME's


Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:34:25 +1000
From: "Mark Cordato" <markc@IX.NET.AU>
Subject: End cutters

Dear group,

I have been suing flush cutting end cutters more and more over the last few years. I seem to be getting more complaints of sharp wires in the last 6 months. It got me to thinking the other day, is anyone else seeing more wires irritating cheeks when cut with flush cutting pliers (Hu Friedy, Dentronix, and Masel).

Mark Cordato


Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 06:16:25 -0700
From: "RTR DDS MS" <smilemaker98@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Photo bond primer

Hi Mark,

I am interested in hearing more about this "photo bond primer" what is the bransd name of this primer and where can I get more info.



Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:50:32 -0400
From: "Barry Raphael" <drbarry@ALIGNMINE.COM>
Subject: OrthoClear's death

I used Invisalign since '99. I had always had alot of admiration for Align and their product. I'd been to two Summits. I tried OrthoClear out of my ususal curiosity and 35 cases later, I couldn't find a reason to turn back. The product was sufficiently different, especially in the management of treatment planning (more flexible and "adjustable"), and handling (easier storage and delivery). I think the open windows caught on the buttons a little better, too, and the buttons lay flush with the aligner. Hey, but preference is a way of life in orthodontics, isn't it. We have 200 different brackets to choose from. Why aren't they all suing each other? I'm sure there are historical parallels in business, if not in orthodontics, where an originator split off from his first endeavor to create a viable competitor and was not punished for it. What is wrong with having a choice? Here is an editorial I wrote for my local dental society, to be published next week... When Business is Bad for the People. Invisalign is the union of decades of orthodontic experience and recent advances in CAD-CAM technology. It is an excellent technique with meticulous lab work by a company devoted to improvement.and to returning shareholder value. The developers of the technique have so thoroughly protected it with patents that they have effectively created a monopoly in this industry segment by being allowed to destroy all competition. When Align Technology's business practices became too aggressive for his comfort, the original developer of the technique left the company and eventually began another, OrthoClear, with the intention of improving the technique and the business process. He succeeded in simplifying the technical process, simplifying the laboratory process, making the technique more flexible for the doctor, and reducing the cost of manufacturing. He worked with one hand tied behind his back, having to work around Align's patent infringements, going so far as to be unable to even number the aligners in sequence. Yet, in a court settlement on September 27, after years of aggressive pursuit by Align, OrthoClear agreed to stop operations immediately in return for a meager 10 million dollars, with the assurance that Align would assume all 35,000 OrthoClear active patients for no charge. Align calls this the "Putting Patients First" program. We have yet to see how this program plays out. How they will absorb 35,000 new cases without significant delays in aligner processing is anybody's guess. Meanwhile, 5,000 dentists have all these patients to deal with. They have the cost of reappointing and reimpressing every case. Each one has to go through Clincheck, the online treatment planning process, again. And each one has to wait for the manufacturing of the aligners, an extra four weeks ASSUMING no delays or backlog. I have never, in my 28 years in dentistry, seen such an intrusion of the legal process on the welfare of our patients. I remember when WE, as dentists, had to be careful of our CONVERSATIONS for fear of antitrust infractions. Why doesn't Align's anticompetitive stance qualify as antitrust? It's an issue that needs further investigation. Meanwhile, I had to take the impressions from my last Orthoclear case and put them in an Invisalign box.They're the only game in town.


Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:11:52 +1000
From: "Dr P. Miles" <pmiles@BEAUTIFULSMILES.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: indirect bonding & RME's

Hi Mark and all

When I use RME's I place them at the same visit as I indirect bond the rest of the arch. Band sizes are selected and seps are placed at the impression appointment and then we indirect bond and then cement the RME in place. By placing the RME last, it does not interfere with seating the indirect transfer tray. You are also correct that the Thermacure had higher failure rates which has been published and therefore a light cured custom base is preferred on the study model. Hope this helps

Peter Miles


Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:25:14 -0400
From: smilemakr@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: ESCO Digest - 12 Oct 2006 to 18 Oct 2006 (#2006-35)


Forestadent has many brackets, including molar brackets, available in nickel-free steel.  Interestingly, they have just come out with a self-ligating bracket that looks remarkably like GAC's Inovation (R) self-ligating bracket, but is nickel-free (probably a more retentive base, too).

Mark Joiner
Santa Cruz, CA