Affiliation:
1. Department of Orthodontics, Private Practice, Ankara, Turkey
2. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Başkent University, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
Summary
Objectives
This non-randomized prospective cohort study aimed to compare the periodontal effects and success rates of mandibular canine-to-canine fixed retainers having different bonding techniques and wire thicknesses.
Materials and methods
Hundred patients requiring retention after orthodontic treatment were assigned to five study groups (n = 20 in each group, 61 females/39 males, median age range 16.5–18.0 years). Retention was provided by 0.0215”/direct, 0.0215”/indirect, 0.0175”/direct, 0.0175”/indirect bonded multistranded wires and removable Essix appliances. The primary and secondary outcomes were periodontal effects and success rates. The patients were examined in 1 week, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months follow-up appointments. Plaque index, gingival index, probing depth, marginal recession, bleeding on probing, failure rate per retainer wire and survival of retainer wires were analysed by Kruskal–Wallis H, Mann–Whitney U and chi-square tests.
Results
Significant differences were observed between the fixed retainer (FR) and Essix (E) groups in gingival index scores at 1 month [mean FR: 1.13 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81–1.44), mean E: 0.40 (95% CI: 0.14–0.69), mean difference: 0.73, P < 0.01], 3 months [mean FR: 0.97/1.01 (95% CI: 0.65–1.30/0.72–1.30), mean E: 0.52 (95% CI: 0.25–0.82), mean differences: 0.45/0.49, P < 0.05], 6 months [mean FR: 0.94 (95% CI: 0.62–1.27), mean E: 0.35 (95% CI: 0.15–0.58), mean difference: 0.59, P < 0.05] and in bleeding on probing scores at 1 month [mean FR: 3.05 (95% CI: 2.12–3.98), mean E: 1.15 (95% CI: 0.42–1.88), mean difference: 1.90, P < 0.01]. The survival rates of retainer wires were 85 per cent for the 0.0215” direct/indirect and 90 per cent for the 0.0175” direct/indirect groups for the 6 months follow-up.
Limitations
Six months follow-up period, which demonstrates only short-term outcomes.
Conclusions
The periodontal outcomes or survival rates of mandibular fixed retainers were not affected by bonding technique or wire thickness, whereas gingival health improved with Essix retainers but not with fixed retainers.
Funder
Başkent University Research Fund
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference26 articles.
1. Gingival health and relapse tendency: a prospective study of two types of lower fixed retainers;Al-Nimri;Australian Orthodontic Journal,2009
2. Long-term follow-up of maxillary fixed retention: survival rate and periodontal health;Dietrich;European Journal of Orthodontics,,2015
3. Indirect vs direct bonding of mandibular fixed retainers in orthodontic patients: Comparison of retainer failures and posttreatment stability. A 2-year follow-up of a single-center randomized controlled trial;Egli;American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics,,2017
4. Survival of bonded lingual retainers with chemical or photo polymerization over a 2-year period: a single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial;Pandis;American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics,2013
5. Long-term experience with direct-bonded retainers: update and clinical advice;Zachrisson;Journal of Clinical Orthodontics,,2007
Cited by
20 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献