I read the case report entitled “Distalization of the maxillary and mandibular dentitions with miniscrew anchorage in a patient with moderate Class I bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion” (Chen G, Teng F, Xu TM. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149:401-10) with great interest. A few doubts were raised in my mind as I read it. The authors classified the case as a moderate anchorage, but they didn’t mention the amounts of retraction of the maxillary and mandibular dentitions that were deemed desirable. They also mentioned that the interradicular space available was enough for the distalization, but they did not quantify it. The dimensions of the miniscrews, which would decrease the amount of interradicular space available for distal movement, were not mentioned.

CBCT superimpositions were carried out as depicted in Figure 8, but it remains unclear whether the maxillary and mandibular dentitions moved by bodily distal movement. Posttreatment changes were depicted by showing distal movement of a point on the crowns of the incisors and molars. It appears that only the inclinations of the incisors and molars changed. The root position was not taken into account in the superimposition; this would be of prime importance in depicting bodily movement and not just tipping.

Furthermore, the increase in SNA of 0.8° after treatment goes against the claim of distalization of the entire arch.