We thank the authors for taking an interest in our article and sending comments. We are happy to provide the following clarifications.

• 1.

  The patients were selected from the database of 89 miniscrew-supported cases of different malocclusions treated over several years. All bimaxillary protrusion patients were treated by a similar predefined indirectly supported miniscrew anchorage protocol in our institute. Only bimaxillary protrusion cases that met the selection criteria mentioned in Material and methods section and having good-quality pretreatment and posttreatment radiographs were included in the study. These patients were consecutively started and finished, and their selection was not based on the results. We did not consider a control group because our objective was to evaluate the absolute control or anchorage loss, if any, with miniscrews and not relative to other methods of anchorage control, including a control sample.

• 2.

  We did not consider the Frankfort horizontal plane as a reference plane for vertical tooth movement because of its unreliability. Instead, the palatal plane and the mandibular plane were used as reference lines to measure vertical tooth movement of maxillary and mandibular teeth, respectively.

• 3.

  The observation is correct. There is a difference in tipping of the maxillary first molars by 2 different parameters, 1 angular and 1 linear, measured from 2 different reference systems. The linear measurements showed net mesial tipping of the maxillary molar (mesial movement at the crown tip was only 0.2 mm greater than at the apex) that was not clinically significant. The coefficient of variation for angular measurement was large, with a mean of −2.43 (SD, 3.12) for the maxillary molar, and these angular changes were not statistically significant. Due to this variation, the net distal tipping shown by this parameter may be clinically irrelevant. This may explain the difference between the 2 results.

• 4.

  Definitely, placing miniscrew implants during the levelling and alignment stage will provide better anchorage control. Future anchorage studies should consider this suggestion when the methodology is designed.