Failure of fixed orthodontic retainers: A systematic review

Mechanical properties of combined packable and high-filled flowable composite used for the fixed retainer: an in vitro study

BACKGROUND

Clinicians often utilize both flowable and packable composites concurrently in bonding fixed retainers. Thus, this study aimed to assess the synergistic effect of these composites in the bonding process.

METHODS

This in vitro study divided specimens into three groups: flowable composite (nano-hybrid, Tetric N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent), packable composite (nano-hybrid, Tetric N-ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent), and combined use of flowable and packable composite. Shear bond strength (SBS), adhesive remnant index (ARI), and wire pull-out resistance were compared among the groups. Statistical analyses were conducted using ANOVA and Tukey tests to compare study groups. Additionally, Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were employed to analyze the ARI index among the groups.

RESULTS

ANOVA results indicated no statistically significant differences among test groups (P = 0.129) regarding SBS. However, a significant difference existed between flowable and packable composite groups (P = 0.01) regarding ARI scores. Among the study groups, flowable composite exhibited the highest frequencies of ARI scores of 1 and 2, whereas packable composite showed the highest frequency of ARI scores of 0. The combined group had higher frequencies of ARI scores of 0 and 1 compared to the flowable composite. The wire pull-out test revealed that the combined application of flowable and packable composite resulted in significantly lower detachments compared to the packable composite alone (P = 0.008). However, no significant differences were observed in the comparisons between the flowable-packable (P = 0.522) and combined-flowable (P = 0.128) groups.

CONCLUSION

The combined use of flowable and packable composites for fixed retainers demonstrated adequate shear bond strength and ideal ARI scores, suggesting it as a suitable adhesive system for bonding orthodontic fixed retainers.

Striving for Perfection: How Stable Is Orthodontic Treatment When Excellent Outcomes Are Achieved? A 9-Year Post-Treatment Retrospective Study

(1) Aims: The main objective of this retrospective study was to assess the long-term stability of difficult orthodontic treatments treated to an excellent result and to correlate stability to possible prognostic factors. Secondary objectives were to observe the changes in retention protocol over time and to assess Oral Health-related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) after a long-term post-treatment follow-up. (2) Methods: Cases presented for final examination by orthodontic postgraduate students were retrospectively screened for eligibility. Eligible patients were recalled for a post-treatment recall appointment (T2), consisting of a clinical examination and intraoral scan, and were asked to complete the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14-DK). Gender, age at treatment commencement (T0), treatment modality and duration, and retention protocol were extracted from the records. At T2, the duration of the retention period was recorded, and retainers in place were clinically compared to the original retention protocol. The following variables were assessed on the sets of models at T0, T1 (end of treatment), and T2: arch length and width, overjet and overbite, Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI), Peer Assessment Rating score (PAR), and Little's Irregularity Index (LII). Multiple regression models were conducted. (3) Results: Eighty-five subjects attended T2. The mean post-treatment follow-up was 9.4 years +/- 2.4. In the upper arch, at T1, 74 patients had a combination of fixed and removable retainers, while at T2, 55 had a fixed retainer only. In the lower arch, at T1, 67 patients had a fixed retainer only, with this number increasing to 76 at T2. From T0 to T1, the PAR score improved by 96.1%, with the improvement remaining at 77.5% at T2. The stability of lower inter-canine and upper inter-premolar widths was significantly correlated with the extent of changes during treatment. The presence of a lower fixed retainer at T2 and a low LII at T1 were prognostic factors for stability. The mean weighted total OHIP-14 score at T2 was very low (1.6 ± 2.4 points). (4) Conclusions: In a sample with an initial high-severity malocclusion and treated to an excellent outcome, long-term stability was very good. Good stability can be retained when a lower fixed retainer is present at T2 and when a low LII is achieved at T1.

Failure frequency of fixed mandibular retainers after pre-treatment of the enamel surface with pumice versus sandblasting-a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To compare retainer survival, periodontal health, and caries implications of fixed lower retainers bonded after pre-treatment of the enamel surface with either pumice or sandblasting.

TRIAL DESIGN

Two-arm parallel-group, two-center randomized controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

One hundred sixty patients (101 females, 59 males, mean age: 17.9) requiring mandibular retainers were consecutively recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to have pre-treatment of the enamel surface with either pumice (n = 80) or sandblasting (n = 80). The primary outcome was retainer survival at 3 (T1) and 12 months (T2) control. Secondary outcomes were carious lesions and periodontal health: plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), calculus index (CI), and probing depth (PD). The randomization sequence was generated using an online randomization and allocation concealment was secured by contacting the sequence generator for treatment assignment. Blinding was not possible at T0 due to the nature of the intervention. Statistical analyses were carried out using the t-test, Fisher's exact test, repeated measure analysis of variance, and log rank test.

RESULTS

Overall, the risk of bonding failure at T1 was 6.7 per cent and at T2 6.9 per cent. There were no statistically significant differences in failure rate between the two groups, neither at T1 (P = 1.000) nor at T2 (P = 0.360). No statistically significant differences were found for the intercanine periodontal indices GI, PI, CI, PD, and caries between the two groups at T0 and T1. At T2, significantly more gingivitis and plaque were seen in the sandblasting group (P = 0.05 and P = 0.047, respectively) compared with the pumice group. Calculus increased during the follow-up period in both groups (P ≤ 0.001) as well as plaque levels (P ≤ 0.001 and P = 0.025, respectively). No harm was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Enamel sandblasting prior to bonding mandibular retainers is not better at preventing bonding failure.

REGISTRATION

275767 (https://www.researchweb.org/is/sverige).

Risk factors for orthodontic fixed retention failure: A retrospective controlled study

Objective

: To investigate the potential correlation between fixed orthodontic retention failure and several patient- and treatment-related factors.

Methods

: Patients finishing treatment with fixed appliances between 2016 and 2017 were retrospectively included in this study. Those not showing fixed retention failure were considered as control group. Patients with fixed retention failure were considered as the experimental group. Additionally, patients with failure of fixed retainers in the period of June 2019 to March 2021 were prospectively identified and included in the experimental group. The location of the first retention failure, sex, pretreatment dental occlusion, facial characteristics, posttreatment dental occlusion, treatment approach and presence of oral habits were compared between groups before and after treatment separately by using a Fisher exact test and a Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

: 206 patients with fixed retention failure were included, 169 in the mandibular and 74 in the maxillary jaws. Significant correlations were observed between retention failure in the mandibular jaws and mandibular arch length discrepancy (P = 0.010), post-treatment growth pattern (P = 0.041), nail biting (P < 0.001) and abnormal tongue function (P = 0.002). Retention failure in the maxillary jaws was more frequent in patients with IPR in the mandibular jaws (P = 0.005) and abnormal tongue function (P = 0.021).

Conclusions

: This study suggests a correlation between fixed retention failure and parafunctional habits, such as nail biting and abnormal tongue function. Prospective studies with larger study populations could further confirm these results.

Bonded lingual retainer adhesives and discoloration : An in vitro study

PURPOSE

This in vitro study was conducted to compare the discoloration of a flowable self-adhesive composite, a highly filled composite adhesive, and a liquid polish applied highly filled composite adhesive for bonded lingual retainers.

METHODS

Thirty composite discs were fabricated and divided into three groups: group 1, flowable self-adhesive (GC Ortho Connect™ Flow [GCO], GC Orthodontics, Tokyo, Japan); group 2, highly filled composite adhesive (Transbond™ LR [TLR], 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA); and group 3, highly filled composite adhesive with liquid polish (TLR and BisCover LV™ [TLRB], BISCO Inc, Schaumburg, IL, USA). L*a*b* values were measured by spectrophotometer prior to (T0) and following (T1) immersion in coffee. T1 - T0 differences were calculated as ∆L*, ∆a*, ∆b*, and ∆E*ab values. The Shapiro-Wilk test was performed to determine whether the data were normally distributed. The values that did not fit the normal distribution were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Dunn's test was used for multiple comparisons. The level of significance was p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The difference between the TLR and TLRB groups was statistically significant for ∆E*ab (P = 0.007). ∆E*ab value of TLR group was greater than ∆E*ab value of TLRB group. The differences between the GCO and TLR groups (p = 0.001) and the TLR and TLRB groups (p = 0.010) were statistically significant for ∆a*. ∆a* values of GCO and TLRB groups were greater than ∆a* value of TLR group. The difference between the TLR and TLRB groups was statistically significant (p = 0.003) for ∆b*. ∆b* value of TLR group was greater than ∆b* value of TLRB group.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a Transbond LR polished with BisCover LV or only GC Ortho Connect Flow for lingual retainer bonding reduces coffee-induced discoloration.

Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces

BACKGROUND

Without a phase of retention after successful orthodontic treatment, teeth tend to 'relapse', that is, to return to their initial position. Retention is achieved by fitting fixed or removable retainers to provide stability to the teeth while avoiding damage to teeth and gums. Removable retainers can be worn full- or part-time. Retainers vary in shape, material, and the way they are made. Adjunctive procedures are sometimes used to try to improve retention, for example, reshaping teeth where they contact ('interproximal reduction'), or cutting fibres around teeth ('percision'). This review is an update of one originally published in 2004 and last updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of different retainers and retention strategies used to stabilise tooth position after orthodontic braces.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and OpenGrey up to 27 April 2022 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving children and adults who had retainers fitted or adjunctive procedures undertaken to prevent relapse following orthodontic treatment with braces. We excluded studies with aligners.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened eligible studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Outcomes were stability or relapse of tooth position, retainer failure (i.e. broken, detached, worn out, ill-fitting or lost), adverse effects on teeth and gums (i.e. plaque, gingival and bleeding indices), and participant satisfaction. We calculated mean differences (MD) for continuous data, risk ratios (RR) or risk differences (RD) for dichotomous data, and hazard ratios (HR) for survival data, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We conducted meta-analyses when similar studies reported outcomes at the same time point; otherwise results were reported as mean ranges. We prioritised reporting of Little's Irregularity Index (crookedness of anterior teeth) to measure relapse, judging the minimum important difference to be 1 mm.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 47 studies, with 4377 participants. The studies evaluated: removable versus fixed retainers (8 studies); different types of fixed retainers (22 studies) or bonding materials (3 studies); and different types of removable retainers (16 studies). Four studies evaluated more than one comparison. We judged 28 studies to have high risk of bias, 11 to have low risk, and eight studies as unclear.  We focused on 12-month follow-up.  The evidence is low or very low certainty. Most comparisons and outcomes were evaluated in only one study at high risk of bias, and most studies measured outcomes after less than a year. Removable versus fixed retainers Removable (part-time) versus fixed   One study reported that participants wearing clear plastic retainers part-time in the lower arch had more relapse than participants with multistrand fixed retainers, but the amount was not clinically significant (Little's Irregularity Index (LII) MD 0.92 mm, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.61; 56 participants). Removable retainers were more likely to cause discomfort (RR 12.22; 95% CI 1.69 to 88.52; 57 participants), but were associated with less retainer failure (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.98; 57 participants) and better periodontal health (Gingival Index (GI) MD -0.34, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.02; 59 participants). Removable (full-time) versus fixed   One study reported that removable clear plastic retainers worn full-time in the lower arch did not provide any clinically significant benefit for tooth stability over fixed retainers (LII MD 0.60 mm, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.03; 84 participants). Participants with clear plastic retainers had better periodontal health (gingival bleeding RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.88; 84 participants), but higher risk of retainer failure (RR 3.42, 95% CI 1.38 to 8.47; 77 participants). The study found no difference between retainers for caries.  Different types of fixed retainers Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) nitinol versus conventional/analogue multistrand One study reported that CAD/CAM nitinol fixed retainers were better for tooth stability, but the difference was not clinically significant (LII MD -0.46 mm, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.21; 66 participants). There was no evidence of a difference between retainers for periodontal health (GI MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.16; 2 studies, 107 participants), or retainer survival (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.49; 1 study, 41 participants). Fibre-reinforced composite versus conventional multistrand/spiral wire  One study reported that fibre-reinforced composite fixed retainers provided better stability than multistrand retainers, but this was not of a clinically significant amount (LII MD -0.70 mm, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.23; 52 participants). The fibre-reinforced retainers had better patient satisfaction with aesthetics (MD 1.49 cm on a visual analogue scale, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.22; 1 study, 32 participants), and similar retainer survival rates (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.21; 7 studies; 1337 participants) at 12 months. However, failures occurred earlier (MD -1.48 months, 95% CI -1.88 to -1.08; 2 studies, 103 participants; 24-month follow-up) and more gingival inflammation at six months, though bleeding on probing (BoP) was similar (GI MD 0.59, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; BoP MD 0.33, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.79; 1 study, 40 participants). Different types of removable retainers Clear plastic versus Hawley When worn in the lower arch for six months full-time and six months part-time, clear plastic provided similar stability to Hawley retainers (LII MD 0.01 mm, 95% CI -0.65 to 0.67; 1 study, 30 participants). Hawley retainers had lower risk of failure (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.83; 1 study, 111 participants), but were less comfortable at six months (VAS MD -1.86 cm, 95% CI -2.19 to -1.53; 1 study, 86 participants). Part-time versus full-time wear of Hawley There was no evidence of a difference in stability between part-time and full-time use of Hawley retainers (MD 0.20 mm, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.68; 1 study, 52 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is low to very low certainty, so we cannot draw firm conclusions about any one approach to retention over another. More high-quality studies are needed that measure tooth stability over at least two years, and measure how long retainers last, patient satisfaction and negative side effects from wearing retainers, such as tooth decay and gum disease.

Survival rates of mandibular fixed retainers: comparison of a tube-type retainer and conventional multistrand retainers : A prospective randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The purposes of this study were to evaluate the survival rate of a tube-type mandibular fixed retainer and compare it to conventional multistrand retainers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In all, 66 patients who had completed their orthodontic treatment were enrolled in this study. They were allocated randomly to a tube-type retainer group or a 0.020 multistrand fixed retainer group. In case of the tube-type retainer, a thermoactive 0.012 NiTi was placed into 6 mini-tubes passively bonded to the anterior teeth. The patients were recalled at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after retainer placement. During the 2‑year follow-up period, any first-time failure of retainers was recorded. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank tests were used to compare the failure rates between the two types of retainers.

RESULTS

Of the 34 patients, 14 (41.2%) showed failure in the multistrand retainer group, whereas only 2 of 32 (6.3%) reported failure in the tube-type retainer group. There was a statistically significant difference in failure between the multistrand retainer and the tube-type retainer (log-rank test, P = 0.001). The hazard ratio was 11.937 (95% confidence interval 2.708-52.620; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The tube-type retainer can be used with fewer concerns about recurrent retainer detachments during orthodontic retention.

Survival of conventionally bonded mandibular retainers with or without enamel sandblasting in orthodontic patients over a 12-month period. A single-centre, split-mouth randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this trial was to assess the effect of enamel sandblasting in addition to the acid-etch technique in reducing first-time failures of fixed mandibular retainers placed over a 12-month period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ethical approval was obtained. Participants were recruited in a single private practice. The primary outcome of this study was any first-time failure of the mandibular fixed retainer assessed at three timepoints over a 12-month period. Three consecutive teeth either on the left or right side (from lower canine-lower central incisor) were randomly allocated to the intervention (sandblasting) and the control (non-sandblasted). Randomization was performed using a centralized randomization service. The patients were randomized in blocks of four and eight with allocation concealment secured by contacting the sequence generator for group assignment. Blinding of either the patient or clinicians was not possible at time of placement of the mandibular retainer.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-seven participants were randomized to receive enamel sandblasting (intervention) and non-sandblasting (control) in the region of the six anterior mandibular teeth in a split-mouth fashion. Participants were recruited between December 2018 to October 2020. The data for all participants were analysed resulting in 394 observations. Overall, the risk of first-time failure was 11.4%. No difference in first-time failures was observed between the intervention (sandblasting) and control (non-sandblasting) groups [hazard ratio (HR), 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.59, 1.88, P = 0.88]. Males had a higher instant probability of first-time failures (HR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.65-6.14; P < 0.01). Participants with a fair level of co-operation had a lower instant probability of first-time failures (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.86; P = 0.02). There were no harms reported to either the participant or their dentition.

CONCLUSIONS

No difference in the first-time failures of mandibular bonded retainers placed with conventional etch-bond technique with or without enamel sandblasting was observed. The overall risk of first-time failure was 11.4%.

REGISTRATION

This trial was not registered prior to trial commencement.

Comparison of periodontal status and failure rates with different retainer bonding methods and adhesives: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

This single-center, randomized clinical trial evaluated and compared retainer bonding among different methods and adhesives in terms of periodontal status and failure rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 100 patients from the orthodontic department of Pamukkale University were randomly assigned to the following 4 groups: group 1, direct bonding (DB) with two-step adhesive; group 2, DB with one-step adhesive; group 3, indirect bonding (IDB) with two-step adhesive; and group 4, IDB with one-step adhesive. Eligibility criteria included good finishing results and oral hygiene, no periodontal or systemic problems, and no missing anterior teeth or restorations. Randomization was carried out using computer-generated random numbers with allocation concealment by opaque, sealed envelopes. The main outcomes were plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and calculus index (CI) recorded at bonding, 6 months (T1), and 12 months (T2) after bonding. A secondary outcome was failure rate. The periodontal outcome assessor was blinded. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and chi-square test.

RESULTS

PI and GI increased with time in all study groups, but there were no significant differences among groups at any time point. A small amount of calculus was observed in all study groups, with the increase in CI for group 3 significantly greater at the T2-T1 time interval (P < .05). There were no significant differences between groups for 12-month failure rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The one-step retainer adhesive was similar in terms of periodontal status and failure rate. Therefore, a one-step adhesive can be used during bonding, regardless of technique.

Effect of self-etch primer application on the bond failure rate of a mandibular bonded lingual retainer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of self-etch primer (SEP) application on the bond failure rate of a mandibular bonded lingual retainer over 24 months.

METHODS

The average age of the 86 individuals included in this study was 17 years 4 months. After the removal of the orthodontic appliances, the lingual retainers, which were made of six-stranded stainless steel wire, were bent and bonded onto the lingual surface of all mandibular anterior teeth. The study was performed using a split-mouth design. In the study group, the SEP was administered to the teeth's lingual surfaces. In the control group, they were etched using 37% phosphoric etchant liquid gel. After etching, the primer was applied. The adhesive resin was applied and the retainer was fitted. The patients were re-evaluated over 24 months. The first bond failures and the amount of adhesive remaining on the tooth were recorded as the adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores. The chi-square test was used to compare the bond failure rates (P = 0.231) and ARI scores between the groups (P = 0.162). The survival rates of the retainers were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier test (P = 0.237). The significance level was P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The bond failure rates, ARI scores, and survival rates did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrated that an SEP can be used successfully in mandibular lingual retainer bonding. In situations where saliva isolation is difficult, bonding a fixed lingual retainer with SEP is recommended.

Analysis of the effectiveness of the fiber-reinforced composite lingual retainer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Orthodontic fixed retainers are preferred as they depend less on patient compliance. Recently, researchers tried to use fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) to replace the multistranded stainless-steel wire (MSW) of the fixed retainers to enhance the mechanical properties and esthetics. This systematic review aimed to analyze the effectiveness of the FRC retainers.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases (May 1, 2021), including Medline, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL. We applied no language or date restrictions in the searches of the databases. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective clinical controlled trials were included. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials and risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions were used to evaluate the risk of bias in RCTs and non-RCTs, respectively. The outcomes were pooled using Review Manager 5.4. The primary outcome of this review was teeth relapse, and the secondary outcomes were bonded retainer failure rate, adverse effect on oral health, and patient's satisfaction.

RESULTS

Eleven out of 99 studies, which included 873 participants, were used in this review, with the follow-up ranging from 6 months to 6 years. Ten studies compared the FRC retainers with MSW retainers, and 1 study compared FRC retainers with a different fiber material. Ten studies were RCT, and 1 was non-RCT. There was 0.39 less relapse with the FRC retainers than with MSW retainers (mean difference, -0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.41 to -0.37; P <0.00001). There was no statistically significant difference in the failure rate between the FRC and MSW with the whole retainer as an outcome unit risk ratio of 1.72 (95% CI, 0.57-5.14; P = 0.33) or with the teeth an as outcome unit risk ratio of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.47-1.52; P = 0.58). There was insufficient evidence to conduct the meta-analysis of the adverse effect on oral health and patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence is available to suggest that the effectiveness of the FRC is comparable to the MSW with no significant difference in the failure rate. However, we have very low certainty on these results. It is worth conducting future robust clinical studies to assess the effectiveness of FRC retainers with long follow-up.

Orthodontic Fixed Retainer and Unwanted Movements of Lower Anterior Teeth: A Case Report

The use of fixed retainers at the end of an orthodontic treatment has become a standard practice. Nonetheless, orthodontic relapse can still occur, requiring retreatment in the most severe cases. This case report describes a patient with a mandibular canine to canine fixed retainer presenting uncontrolled torque on all lower anterior teeth, probably due to tongue thrust and/or activation of the wire. Multibracket orthodontic treatment was performed, and an orthodontic lingual sectional was used to control (reposition) the root movement of the lower right cuspid. This case highlights the need for clinicians and patients to be aware of the potential problems associated with bonded retainers. In addition, patients with an orthodontic fixed retainer need regular short-term observation by an orthodontist in order to detect any adverse movements and long-term control by a general dentist.

Survival and failure rate of lower lingual bonded retainers: a retrospective cohort evaluation

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of the study were to evaluate the survival rates for lower lingual retainers (LLRs) and to establish a correlation between patients' treatment-related factors (age, sex, malocclusion, appliance used for treatment, teeth bonded, retention protocols) to the survival of LLRs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 765 subjects [474 females and 291 males: mean age = 24.29 ± 10.67 years] between 2013 and 2022 were included. A customized data collection form was utilized to gather the data from the electronic health record (EHR) of subjects. Patient-related factors, crowding or spacing, deep bite or open bite and duration of treatment were extracted from patients' files. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used for the survival function, whereas Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to associate risk factors with retainer survival.

RESULTS

328 (42.9%) subjects had their LLRs failed, and the survival period was on average 17.37 ± 22.85 months. On the other hand, the follow-up period for the retainers that did not fail was on average 47.19 ± 23.66 months. 192 (28.3%) subjects had segment failure (retainer detached from 3 teeth or less), while 51 (7.5%) subjects had failures in more than 3 teeth (complete). None of the evaluated clinical variables were significantly associated with LLRs failure except for the bite category (P = .013) and the appliance used for treatment (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Success rate for LLRs was 57.1% over 47.19 months, failure rate was 42.9% over 17.37 months. The presence of deep bite and treatment with aligners were significantly associated with increased failure rate.

Bruxism’s Implications on Fixed Orthodontic Retainer Adhesion

Background: Fixed retainers assist in maintaining the outcomes of orthodontic treatment. Fixed retention may be affected by bruxism. Objective: Evaluate two adhesives (an ormocer and a flowable composite) used for fixed orthodontic retention in simulated bruxism settings, compared to regular mastication, using a dual axis chewing simulator. Methods: Eighty human teeth were used. Periodontal tissues were simulated and exposed to 120,000 mechanical cycles, corresponding to 6 months of clinical service. Each set of two teeth was supplied with a pre-shaped, fixed, multi-braided, stainless steel wire retainer, in 1.5 cm portions, to establish passive contact with the lingual surface of the teeth. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was used to evaluate the shear bond strength. A stereomicroscope was used to assess the micro-infiltration. Results: There was no significant difference in the mean value of micro-infiltration between adhesives in the mastication group but in the bruxism group. During testing, one composite sample (ARI score 1) was broken in the mastication group, while three ormocer samples (ARI score 2) and one composite sample (ARI score 1) were broken in the bruxism group. Conclusions: The mean value for micro-infiltration in composite (0.31) was more than double that in ormocer (0.13).

Relapse and inadvertent tooth movement post orthodontic treatment in individuals with fixed retainers: A review

Orthodontists must fully inform patients about the implications of orthodontic treatment and the subsequent need for retention. This review provides an update on relapse, unwanted movements and different factors that can cause loss of stability following orthodontic treatment. Since it is difficult to predict which patients will present some degree of loss of stability after treatment, it is important that they be treated as if they have a high potential for relapse. The present review included a bibliographic search in the main sources of scientific review including Medline via PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane library. The search strategy was carried out until May 5, 2022. Only 34 studies fulfilling the selection criteria. Our results showed that maintaining teeth in the correct position following orthodontic treatment is a great challenge for orthodontists. The etiology of relapse is complex and not yet clearly established. Its origin is attributed to factors such as the time of gingival and periodontal tissue reorganization and changes produced by growth, compromising the stability of the results achieved with orthodontic treatment. The retention phase is necessary after orthodontic treatment to avoid relapse or loss of the occlusion results obtained. However, fixed retainers may induce unwanted tooth movement that may occur despite these retainers being attached and intact. There is currently no consensus among orthodontists regarding the ideal type of wire for fixed containment. We concluded that post-orthodontic treatment relapse is the result of a regression towards the original malocclusion. However, changes in the position of the teeth can also occur, which are considered as unwanted movements and have a multifactorial origin.

Survival analysis of three types of maxillary and mandibular bonded orthodontic retainers: a retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Retention is an important aspect of orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to analyze the survival of three types of maxillary and mandibular bonded orthodontic retainers.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated the records of 118 orthodontic patients (90 females, 28 males, mean age of 22.34 ± 6.44 years) retrieved from a private orthodontic office. Data regarding the retainer failure, dental caries, unwanted tooth movements, maximum pocket depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP) recorded at the follow-up sessions were extracted from patient records. Three types of retainer wires namely Bond-A-Braid, Orthoflex, and Retainium were compared regarding the abovementioned parameters. Data were analyzed by ANOVA, Chi-square, Monte-Carlo Chi-square, and Kruskal Wallis tests, the log rank test, and the Cox regression model.

RESULTS

The frequency of retainer failure was not significantly different between males and females, different age groups, or different treatment durations (P > 0.05). Wire fracture was the most common failure type in both the maxilla and mandible. Also, the frequency of failure was not significantly different between the maxillary and mandibular retainers (P > 0.05). The frequency of failure, and survival of the three types of retainer wires were not significantly different during a 5-year period (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The three types of orthodontic retainers had comparable survival rates. Their failure rate was not correlated with the age or gender of patients or the treatment duration.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Oral Hygiene, Periodontal Health, and Treatment Satisfaction of Orthodontic Retention Patients up to Ten Years after Treatment-A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: This cross-sectional study evaluated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) on (1) oral hygiene, (2) periodontal health, (3) retainer failure, (4) orthodontic treatment satisfaction, and (5) outcome satisfaction in orthodontic retention patients. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether orthodontic retention treatment is associated with patient-reported outcome measures on oral hygiene, periodontal health, and treatment satisfaction. Methods: A ten-item questionnaire on the five PROMs was conducted among 211 consecutive retention patients up to ten years following orthodontic treatment. Linear regression models were computed to detect possible associations between the PROMs and retention treatment or patient characteristics. Results: The presence of a fixed lingual retainer was not associated with the reduced ability to perform oral hygiene, self-perceived periodontal health, or orthodontic outcome satisfaction. Older patients were more content with the orthodontic treatment result (p < 0.05). Patients with fixed lingual retainers in the mandible were less satisfied with the course of orthodontic treatment (p < 0.05). Smokers more often reported gingival bleeding (p < 0.05). Females reported increased gingival recessions (p < 0.05) and perceived their teeth as longer than before treatment (p < 0.05). Longer orthodontic treatment duration corresponded to retainer failure (p < 0.05). Conclusions: In general, long-term orthodontic retention patients were satisfied with orthodontic treatment. These patients reported the satisfactory ability to perform adequate oral hygiene and periodontal health, and they communicated a high degree of treatment and outcome contentment. However, patients with a retainer in the mandible were less satisfied with orthodontic treatment.

Orthodontic Retention-Protocols and Materials-A Questionnaire Pilot Study among Polish Practitioners

The aim of the study was to analyze retention protocols and materials for fixed retainers used by clinicians providing orthodontic treatment in Poland. The survey was carried out from February to April 2021. The questionnaire was designed using the Google Forms tool. After validation, the questionnaire was delivered to verified active orthodontists gathered in a closed social media group of 615 members. Finally, 104 answers were received. Answers to individual questions were provided in percentages and tabularized. A chi-squared test of proportion was used to compare: the proportion of clinicians using retainers of different characteristics and the proportions of clinicians indicating the superiority of a given clinical solution. Rectangular steel braided wire was rated as most reliable. However, doctors who declared to use gold chain were mostly solely using this type of wire. Multistranded round wire was rated the worst. Fiber-reinforced composite was mainly used in periodontal patients. The protocols used by Polish orthodontic practitioners relied on double long-term retention with regular follow-up. The most popular material was stainless steel braided rectangular wire bonded with a flowable composite. Most clinicians believed they could maintain the treatment results, but they declared that patients’ cooperation was a challenge.

Comparative assessment of relapse and failure between CAD/CAM stainless steel and standard stainless steel fixed retainers in orthodontic retention patients

OBJECTIVES

To compare relapse and failure rates of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and standard fixed retainers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, single-blinded, prospective randomized clinical trial included 46 patients who completed active orthodontic treatment and complied with retention visits. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups: CAD/CAM group with multistranded stainless steel wires (CAD/CAM, n = 16), Lab group with the same multistranded wires (lab, n = 16), and control group with stainless steel Ortho-FlexTech wires (traditional, n = 14). Intraoral scans were obtained at placement of fixed retainers (T1), 3-month visit (T2), and 6-month visit (T3) and measured for intercanine width and Little's Irregularity Index. Failures were recorded.

RESULTS

The CAD/CAM group experienced less intercanine width decrease than the traditional group at 3 months (mean difference, 0.83 ± 0.16 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.22; P < .001) and 6 months (mean difference, 1.23 ± 0.40 mm; 95% CI, 0.19-2.27; P < .05). The CAD/CAM group experienced less increase in Little's Irregularity Index compared with the lab group within 3 months (mean difference, 0.81 ± 0.27 mm; 95% CI, 0.12-1.49; P < .05). Failures from greatest to least were experienced by the lab group (43.8%), the CAD/CAM group (25%), and the traditional group (14.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Within 6 months of bonding fixed retainers, CAD/CAM fixed retainers showed less relapse than lab-based and traditional chairside retainers and less failures than lab-based retainers.

Orthodontic treatment of an adolescent with cerebral palsy - A case report

Cerebral palsy is a common cause of chronic motor neuron impairment. A constant prevalence of 2 to 3/1000 births in industrialized countries has been described. This case report describes the treatment of a 9 year old boy presenting this form of motor neuron impairment and class II malocclusion with an overjet of 14 mm, hyperdivergent growth pattern and various habits. Orthodontic treatment consisted mainly of a two-phase treatment. The first phase was treated with removable appliances and followed by a phase with fixed appliances. Treatment duration with removable appliances was 4 years and 5 months and for the fixed appliance phase, 1 year and 7 months. A class I occlusion could be achieved in this case by removable and fixed orthodontic appliances combined with adjunctive treatment for the hypotonic orofacial musculature.

Treatment stability with bonded versus vacuum-formed retainers: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

In orthodontics, the retention phase can be considered challenging and unpredictable. Therefore, evidence obtained from different retention protocols is important to facilitate clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of bonded versus vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) regarding their capacity to maintain treatment stability, periodontal effects, and failure rates.

SEARCH METHODS AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Ten databases comprising published and unpublished literature were systematically searched up to August 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing both retainers were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The risk of bias (RoB) evaluation was performed with the Cochrane Collaboration RoB Tool 2.0. All steps of the screening phase and RoB assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. The Grade of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

Initial database search yielded 923 studies. After duplicates removal and full-text assessment, five RCTs remained. Overall, the studies presented Low RoB, except one study judged with 'Some concerns'. Based on the included studies, on a short-term (3-6 months) and long-term (4 years) basis, bonded retainers (BRs) were more effective to maintain treatment stability than VFRs in the lower arch. However, from 12 to 24 months both retainers presented the same efficacy. In the upper arch, the retainers were equally effective. BRs were associated with greater plaque and calculus accumulation than VFRs after 12 months. The retainers' failure rates were similar in the upper arch on the first year of retention; however, after 2 years VFRs showed significantly greater failure rates. Contrarily, BRs presented greater failure rates in the lower arch than VFRs.

LIMITATIONS

The findings of the included studies may be influenced by different factors related to the unpredictability of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the evidence generated in this systematic review derived from a moderate level of certainty. In the lower arch, BRs are more effective than VFRs to maintain treatment stability in the initial 6 months of retention and in the long term. In the upper arch, both retention protocols are equally effective.

REGISTRATION

Regist0ration number: PROSPERO CRD42020199392.

FUNDING

Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Educational Personnel (CAPES, Process code-001).

A comparative assessment of failures and periodontal health between 2 mandibular lingual retainers in orthodontic patients. A 2-year follow-up, single practice-based randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the survival rates and periodontal health in patients with 3-strand round twisted (RT) vs 8-strand rectangular braided (RB) fixed retainers bonded to all 6 anterior teeth in the mandible.

METHODS

A total of 133 patients completing orthodontic treatment (median age, 24.6 years; 25th percentile, 17.2 years; 75th percentile, 32.4 years; minimum, 15.1 years; maximum, 49.8 years) were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either an RT or RB wire retainer. Inclusion criteria were all mandibular permanent incisors and canines present, no active caries, no restorations, no fractures on the mandibular incisors and canines, no periodontal disease. Patients with poor oral hygiene before debonding were excluded from the trial. The primary outcome was any first-time retainer failure. Secondary outcomes were periodontal index, bleeding on probing, plaque index, gingival index, and probing depth. Randomization was accomplished with random permuted blocks of size 4, 6, or 8 with allocation concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Blinding was not possible in this trial. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after placement of the retainer. Retainer survival was assessed using Cox regression. Periodontal parameters were reported at each time point and generalised estimating equations were used to assess the effect of treatment, time, tooth and treatment X time interaction on the indices.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups; in 1 patient, the intervention was discontinued. During 2-year follow-up 37 of 66 (56.1%, RT group) and 32 of 66 (48.5%, RB group) retainers failed at least once (log-rank test, P = 0.55). The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-1.12; P = 0.13). Neither age nor gender was a predictor of failure. All periodontal parameters (periodontal index, bleeding on probing, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth) were comparable between groups and remained relatively stable during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall risk for first-time failure was high and amounted to 52.3% (56.1% in the RT group and 48.5% in the RB group). There was no difference in terms of survival or periodontal health between the examined retainers.

3D Occlusal Tooth Wear Assessment in Presence of Limited Changes in Non-Occlusal Surfaces

The study aimed to develop an accurate and convenient 3D occlusal tooth wear assessment technique, applicable when surfaces other than the occlusal undergo changes during the observation period. Various degrees of occlusal tooth wear were simulated in vitro on 18 molar and 18 premolar plaster teeth. Additionally, their buccal and lingual surfaces were gently grinded to induce superficial changes and digital dental models were generated. The grinded and the original tooth crowns were superimposed using six different 3D techniques (two reference areas with varying settings; gold standard: GS). Superimposition on intact structures provided the GS measurements. Tooth wear volume comprised the primary outcome measure. All techniques differed significantly to each other in their accuracy (p < 0.001). The technique of choice (CCD: complete crown with 30% estimated overlap of meshes) showed excellent agreement with the GS technique (median difference: 0.045, max: 0.219 mm³), no systematic error and sufficient reproducibility (max difference < 0.040 mm³). Tooth type, tooth alignment in the dental arches, and amount of tooth wear did not significantly affect the results of the CCD technique (p > 0.01). The suggested occlusal tooth wear assessment technique is straightforward and offers accurate outcomes when limited morphological changes occur on surfaces other than the occlusal.

How do general dental practitioners perceive and deal with orthodontic bonded retainers?

INTRODUCTION

Long-term follow-up and management of orthodontic bonded retainers require a strong collaboration between orthodontists and general dental practitioners (GDPs). This study aimed to evaluate if Eastern French GDPs were aware of bonded retainers' complications and side effects and if they were willing to take part in their long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Two-hundred and eighteen randomly selected GDPs were invited to answer an online questionnaire. The initial sections covered their experience and management with bonded retainers. In the final sections, GDPs were asked their opinion on the responsibility for long-term follow-up of patients wearing fixed retainers and on the mutual communication between orthodontists and GDPs. Statistical analysis involved descriptive statistics and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Response rate was 32.6% (n = 71). The vast majority of GDPs were familiar with loose retainers, but only 45.2% were willing to repair them. Respondents offering orthodontic services on a regular basis were more likely to insert retainers and repair loose or broken retainers (P < 0.001). Approximately 18.6% of GDPs were aware of third-order side effects encountered with unintentionally active retainers bonded to all 6 anterior teeth. For 88.8% of GDPs, permanent retention was justified, whereas 90% of the dentists refused to be responsible for long-term supervision of fixed retainers. In addition, 67.1% were interested in further training on orthodontic retention, and 92.9% would appreciate clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge about the harmful side effects of bonded retainers was evaluated as insufficient among surveyed GDPs. Long-term follow-up of patients wearing bonded retainers raises issues that should be addressed globally by enhancing mutual communication, practitioners' education, and patients' involvement.

Evaluation of antimicrobial properties of nano-silver particles used in orthodontics fixed retainer composites: an experimental in-vitro study

Background. The present study evaluated the antimicrobial efficacy of composite resins containing nano-silver (NAg) particles used in fixed orthodontic retainers. Methods. Nano-composite resin samples with 1%, 2%, and 5% concentrations of NAg were prepared. The antimicrobial effectiveness of NAg was assessed against Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sanguis, and Lactobacillus acidophilus by the biofilm inhibition test (three-day-old biofilms), eluted components test (on days 3, 15, and 30), and disk-diffusion agar test after 48 hours. Measures of central tendency and index of dispersion were used to determine colony-forming units. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test were also used. Results. The biofilm inhibition test showed a significant decrease in the colonies of S. mutans (87.64%, 96.47%, and 99.76% decrease), S. sanguis (98.13%, 99.47%, and 99.93% decrease), and L. acidophilus (81.59%, 90.90%, and 99.61% decrease) at 1%, 2%, and 5% concentrations of Nag, respectively, compared to the control groups. The colony-forming unit (CFU)/mL of tested microorganisms continuously decreased with increased NAg concentration. In the eluted component test, no significant differences were noted in the 3rd, 15th, and 30th days between the different concentrations of Nag-containing composite resin disks and control samples. According to the disk-diffusion agar test, there was no growth inhibition zone for the composite resin disks containing 1% and 2% concentrations of Nag. However, the growth inhibition zone was seen with a 5% concentration, with a diameter of 9.5±0.71 mm for S. mutans, 8.5±0.71 mm for S. sanguis, and 8±1.41 for L. acidophilus. Conclusion. The incorporation of NAg into composite resins has antibacterial effects, possibly preventing dental caries around fixed orthodontic retainers.

Universal Adhesive for Fixed Retainer Bonding: In Vitro Evaluation and Randomized Clinical Trial

This study aims to assess the efficacy of a universal adhesive (Scotchbond Universal, 3M ESPE) (SB) in total-etch mode, compared to a traditional orthodontic primer (Transbond XT Primer, 3M ESPE) (XT Primer), to perform bonding of orthodontic fixed retainers along with the Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive Paste (3M ESPE). For the in vitro study, a round section wire (Ortosmail Krugg) was bonded using XT Primer for 20 bovine incisors (Group 1) and SB for other 20 (Group 2). Samples were debonded in a universal testing machine applying a tangential force to specimens (crosshead speed of 1 millimeter per minute). Shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were calculated. For the in vivo study, 100 patients needing upper and lower canine-to-canine fixed retainers after orthodontic treatment were randomly assigned to two groups of 50 participants each, i.e., group 1 (retainer bonding with XT Primer) and group 2 (retainer bonding with SB). Over two years, examinations were carried out monthly, and detachments were registered by considering the teeth and arches affected. In vitro, no statistically significant differences in SBS and ARI scores were demonstrated between the two groups, both showing a mean bond strength of about 12 MPa and major frequency of ARI "2" (>50% remnant adhesive on the enamel). Conversely, a significantly lower failure rate over 2 years was assessed clinically for group 2 in both arches. Independently of the adhesive and arch, incisors reported a significantly higher failure rate than canines. Scotchbond Universal used in total-etch mode could be a valid alternative to the traditional orthodontic Transbond XT Primer.

Clinical factors affecting the longevity of fixed retainers and the influence of fixed retainers on periodontal health in periodontitis patients: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical factors affecting the longevity of fixed retainers and the influence of fixed retainers on periodontal health in periodontitis patients.

METHODS

In total, 52 patients with at least 2 years of follow-up after periodontal and orthodontic treatment were included in this study. After scaling and root planing, orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances or clear aligners was performed. Fixed retainers with twist-flex stainless steel wires were bonded to the palatal or lingual sides of anterior teeth. Changes in clinical parameters, including the plaque index, gingival index, calculus index (CI), probing pocket depth, and radiographic bone levels, were evaluated before bonding of fixed retainers and at a 12-month follow-up. Cumulative survival rates (CSRs) for retainer failure were evaluated according to sex, site, CI, stage of periodontitis, and the severity of the irregularity with the log-rank test and hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Twelve months after bonding of fixed retainers, improvements were observed in all clinical parameters except CI and radiographic bone gain. The overall CSR of the retainers with a CI <1 at the 12-month follow-up after bonding of fixed retainers was significantly higher than that of the retainers with a CI ≥1 at the 12-month follow-up (log-rank test; P<0.001). Patients with stage III (grade B or C) periodontitis had a higher multivariate HR for retainer failure (5.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-23.91; P=0.026) than patients with stage I (grade A or B) periodontitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fixed retainers were bonded in periodontitis patients, periodontal health was well maintained if supportive periodontal treatment with repeated oral hygiene education was provided. Nonetheless, fixed retainer failure occurred more frequently in patients who had stage III (grade B or C) periodontitis or a CI ≥1 at 12-month follow-up after bonding of fixed retainers.

3D Method for Occlusal Tooth Wear Assessment in Presence of Substantial Changes on Other Tooth Surfaces

Early diagnosis and timely management of tooth or dental material wear is imperative to avoid extensive restorations. Previous studies suggested different methods for tooth wear assessment, but no study has developed a three-dimensional (3D) superimposition technique applicable in cases where tooth surfaces, other than the occlusal, undergo extensive morphological changes. Here, we manually grinded plaster incisors and canines to simulate occlusal tooth wear of varying severity in teeth that received a wire retainer bonded on their lingual surfaces, during the assessment period. The corresponding dental casts were scanned using a surface scanner. The modified tooth crowns were best-fit approximated to the original crowns using seven 3D superimposition techniques (two reference areas with varying settings) and the gold standard technique (GS: intact adjacent teeth and alveolar processes as superimposition reference), which provided the true value. Only a specific technique (complete crown with 20% estimated overlap of meshes), which is applicable in actual clinical data, showed perfect agreement with the GS technique in all cases (median difference: −0.002, max absolute difference: 0.178 mm³). The outcomes of the suggested and the GS technique were highly reproducible (max difference < 0.040 mm³). The presented technique offers low cost, convenient, accurate, and risk-free tooth wear assessment.

In vitro comparison of the torsional load transfer of various commercially available stainless-steel wires used for fixed retainers in orthodontics

OBJECTIVE

To assess the torsional load transfer of various commercially available stainless-steel wires used for fixed retainers.

DESIGN

An in vitro study using a robotic device.

SETTING

Department of Pediatric Oral Health and Orthodontics, University of Basel.

METHODS

A 10° proclination of a maxillary lateral incisor of a 2-2 retainer was simulated with a robotic device. Eight stainless-steel wires with different shapes (round or rectangular), types (plain, braided, coaxial or chain) and dimensions were selected to measure the torsional load transfer at the adjacent central incisor. The influence of annealing was also tested.

RESULTS

The 0.016 × 0.016 and Bond-A-Braid™ wires (0.02645 × 0.01055-inch, 8-stranded, braided) showed the largest relative torsional load transfer (3.7% and 3.3%, respectively). The two multistranded wires - Triple Flex™ and Respond® - showed the smallest values of 1.0% and 0.7%, respectively. The spiral direction of these two multistranded wires affected the load transfer, the twisting showing larger torsional load transfer than the untwisting one.

CONCLUSION

The effective torsional load transfer depends on the dimension, shape and type of a wire. Plain and braided retainers were more predictable in torsional load transfer than multistranded retainers, which may have stored more energy in the area between the composite bonding sites. This may explain the unexpected complications reported in multistranded retainers.

Post-Orthodontic Lower Incisors Recessions: Combined Periodontic and Orthodontic Approach

The bonded lingual retainer (BLR) is considered a favorable choice for retaining lower incisors' alignment post-orthodontic treatment; however, it may cause some unwanted effects such as inadvertent tooth movement and torque changes. These often result in gingival recession (Miller class III-type) with exposure of the root surface, which compromises the esthetics and hinders the comfort of the patient. Fifteen post-orthodontic patients presenting Miller class III-type recessions with BLR were examined. Two protocols were used: the first included the removal of the BLR prior to surgery and the second included only a surgical approach. All patients underwent the same surgery of a modified tunnel double papilla procedure for root coverage. The gingival recession was measured using a dental probe before, and three to six months post-surgery. The average improvement in recession depth was significantly greater (p = 0.008) for the protocol that included removal of the BLR (4.0 ± 0.83 mm) with an improvement of 87.2% as compared to the second protocol that showed an improvement of 43.8% (1.88 ± 1.29 mm). Removing the BLR prior to surgery is beneficial for predictable root coverage in post-orthodontic Miller class III recessions.

Periodontal effects and survival rates of different mandibular retainers: comparison of bonding technique and wire thickness

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.

Adult orthodontic retreatment: A survey of patient profiles and original treatment failings

INTRODUCTION

A growing number of adult patients are seeking orthodontic treatment. This research aimed to analyze the particulars of patients seeking retreatment and identify the causes of their original treatment failure.

METHODS

An online questionnaire survey of adults seeking first-time orthodontic treatment (control) and retreatment (study) was conducted. Index of complexity, outcome, and need (ICON) scores were determined. Appraisal of treatment records was carried out to identify the causes of original treatment failure.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between retreatment adult patients and first-timers regarding reasons for seeking orthodontic treatment, malocclusion type, self-perception of malocclusion, level of self-motivation, willingness for surgery, expectations of treatment improvement and duration. The predominant reason for seeking treatment in both groups was for aesthetic concerns. Retreatment patients presented with lower ICON scores (39.4; standard error, 0.26) than the first-time patients (54.3; standard error, 0.23), P ≤0.001. The predominant reasons for original treatment failings were poor treatment, maturational changes, inadequate retention, shortcomings in diagnosis and treatment planning, and unfavorable growth. Other causes were related to transverse deficiency, secondary malocclusion (after periodontal breakdown), poor retention compliance, and temporomandibular joint degeneration.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult orthodontic retreatment and first-time seekers' profiles are remarkably similar. Aesthetic concerns were the leading reasons patients sought treatment. ICON was not a useful proxy of patient profiles. Poor treatment was the chief reason for the failure of the original treatment. In terms of clinical significance, clinicians should be mindful of the patient profiles of retreatment seekers and vigilant about the possible causes of failings of orthodontic treatment to avoid suboptimal outcomes.

"Clinical comparison of bond failure rate between two types of mandibular canine-canine bonded orthodontic retainers- a randomized clinical trial"

BACKGROUND

Bonded retainers are widely used as they are esthetically pleasing, easily acceptable, provide greater stability, compliance free and causes no soft tissue irritation and speech problems. Though, fracture and bond failure are their shortcomings. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to evaluate the number of bond failures and type of failure pattern between two types of mandibular canine-canine bonded retainers.

METHODS

Total 60 subjects were recruited initially and were assessed for eligibility, out of which 6 were excluded and 2 were lost to follow up. They were randomly divided into two groups. Fiber reinforced composite (FRC) retainers were inserted in group 1 subjects while group 2 subjects received multistranded stainless steel (MSW) retainers. The subjects were recalled after every 3 months over a period of 1 year. Bond failure rate and failure pattern based on adhesive remnant index were evaluated at each visit. The bond failure rate and failure pattern were compared between the two retainers by using Chi-square test.

RESULTS

The bond failure rates were 42.94% for FRC retainer and 31.41% for MSW retainer. Hence, total number of bond failures in both retainers were 37.17%. The difference of bond failure between two groups was statistically significant (p = 0.012). Type "0" failure pattern was detected commonly with both types of retainers (p <  0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that multistranded stainless steel wire retainer is a superior option to be used for fixed lingual retention in mandibular arch as it exhibited lower bond failure as compared to fiber reinforced composite retainer. Adhesive failure is the most common type of bond failure observed with both types of fixed retainers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ID NCT03881813 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ); March 19, 2019, retrospective registration.

Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers

BACKGROUND

Long-term retention with fixed retainers with a high success rate seems to be a reasonable solution to minimize or prohibit relapse of orthodontic treatment.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty patients between 13 and 30 years old were recruited for this study. The 0.0175 stainless steel twisted wire (G&H Orthodontics, USA) was compared with a single-strand ribbon titanium lingual retainer wire (Retainium, Reliance orthodontics, USA) was used. When treatment was completed, the retainers were bonded from canine to canine in the mandibular arch of the participants. In the follow-up visits, the patients were recalled every 3 months during the 24 months. Detachments, the time of debonding, and side effects were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed by a blinded statistician using a statistical package for Social Science (SPSS, Version20). After descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to measure the survival rates of each retainer. P value < 0.05 was considered as significant.

RESULTS

Finally, 138 patients who received twisted wire splint and 112 patients who received ribbon wire were included in the analysis. The average duration of success was about 23 months for twisted wire and ribbon wire, according to the Kaplan-Meier estimates. The analysis showed no significant overall difference between the treatments (p = 0.13). Failure rates in terms of detachments in all groups occurred at the enamel junction, and it was 25 in twisted retainer group (18.1%) and was 10 in ribbon retainer group (8.9%); the Kaplan-Meier analysis test detected a significant difference in the failure rates between the groups (p = 0/006).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the conventional twisted stainless steel wire and single-strand titanium flat metal ribbon wire as fixed orthodontic retainers have the same clinical effects, it was shown that the ribbon wire has less failure in terms of detachments.

Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated and compared the completeness of reporting of abstracts of orthodontics systematic reviews before and after the publication of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Abstracts Checklist (PRISMA-A).

METHODS

Abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthodontics published in PubMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases before March 23, 2018, that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, were evaluated using the 12 items of PRISMA-A, scoring each item from 0 to 2. Abstracts were classified into 2 groups: before and after publication of the PRISMA-A checklist. Three calibrated evaluators (intraclass correlation coefficient and kappa > 0.8) assessed the scores for compliance with the checklist. The number of authors, country of affiliation of the first author, performance of meta-analysis, and topic of the article were recorded. A regression analysis was performed to assess the associations between abstract characteristics and the PRISMA-A scores.

RESULTS

Of 1034 abstracts evaluated, 389 were included in the analysis. The mean PRISMA-A score was 53.39 (95% CI, 51.83-54.96). The overall score for studies published after the publication of the checklist was significantly higher than for studies published before (P ≤ 0.0001). The components returning significantly higher scores after publication of PRISMA-A were title (P = 0.024), information from databases (P = 0.026), risk of bias (P ≤ 0.0001), included studies (P ≤ 0.0001), synthesis of results (P ≤ 0.0001), interpretation of results (P = 0.035), financing and conflict of interest (P ≤ 0.0001), and registration (P ≤ 0.0001). These results showed the positive effect of PRISMA-A had on the quality of reporting of orthodontics systematic reviews. Nevertheless, the poor adherence revealed that there is still need for improvement in the quality of abstract reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting of abstracts of orthodontic systematic reviews and meta-analyses increased after the introduction of PRISMA-A.

Survival of maxillary and mandibular bonded retainers 10 to 15 years after orthodontic treatment: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The long-term evidence regarding failures of fixed retainers is limited and the aim of this cohort study was to assess the long-term risk of failure of one type of maxillary and two types of mandibular fixed lingual retainers.

TRIAL DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Eighty-eight patients in retention 10-15 years after orthodontic treatment were included. The type of failure; number of failures per tooth, per patient, and retainer; and adverse effects were assessed by (1) a questionnaire, (2) clinical examination, and (3) screening patients' clinical charts. Descriptive statistics were calculated and a Cox regression was used to assess possible predictors for mandibular retainer survival.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In the mandible, 47 (53.4%) .016″ × .022″ braided stainless steel retainers (SS) were bonded to all six anterior teeth, and 41 (46.6%) .027″ β-titanium (TMA) retainers were bonded to the canines only. From the SS retainers 40.4% and of the TMA retainers 61% had no failures during the whole observation period. SS failures per retainer were 2.17 (3.15) vs. 0.66 (1.03) for TMA. The type of retainer was the only significant predictor for failure. In the maxilla, 82 (93.2%) .016″ × .022″ braided SS retainers were bonded to all four incisors and six retainers (6.8%) to all six anterior teeth. The latter group was not further analyzed due to the small sample size. From the retainers bonded to all four incisors, 74.4% had no failure during the whole observation period. SS average number of failures per retainer bonded to the four incisors was 1.14 (SD 2.93). Overall, detachments were the most frequent type of first failure followed by composite damage. From the original mandibular retainers 98.9% and of the original maxillary retainers 97.6% were still in situ 10-15 years after debonding. No adverse torque changes were observed.

LIMITATIONS

Potential effects of selection bias, information bias, and attrition bias as well as possible confounding factors cannot be fully excluded in this study.

Fixed Orthodontic Retainers: A Review

Orthodontic retention is defined as maintaining teeth in optimal aesthetic and functional position after treatment. Despite the necessity of retention phase and the factors influencing the stability of the teeth after orthodontic treatment was discussed by the orthodontist for a long time, it is accepted that a retention phase is essential for stability of orthodontic treatment results nowadays. Therefore, the application of a suitable retention method is important both for prevention of relapse after orthodontic treatment and for increasing patient satisfaction. Removable appliances had been used for many years for retention purposes. Later, fixed retainers were introduced to prevent relapse as having a number of advantages, such as better aesthetics, no need for patient cooperation, effectiveness, and suitability for lifelong retention. However, their need for precise bonding technique, fragility, and tendency to cause periodontal problems by weakening oral hygiene are some of their disadvantages.

Development of a clinical practice guideline for orthodontic retention

OBJECTIVES

To develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for orthodontic retention (OR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CPG was developed according to the AGREE II instrument and EBRO (Dutch methodology for evidence-based guideline development). Reporting was done according the RIGHT statement. A Task Force developed clinical questions regarding OR. To answer these questions, a systematic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was performed. Two independent researchers identified and selected studies, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane RoB tool and rated quality of evidence using GRADE. The Task Force formulated considerations and recommendations after discussing the evidence. The concept CPG was sent for commentary to all relevant stakeholders.

RESULT

One systematic review-with 15 studies-met the inclusion criteria. In case of low evidence and lack of outcome measures, expert-based considerations were developed. Over four meetings, the Task Force reached consensus on considerations and recommendations, after which the concept CPG was ready for the commentary phase. After processing the comments, the CPG was presented to the Dutch Association of Orthodontists, whereafter authorization followed.

LIMITATIONS

The paucity of evidence-based studies concerning OR and the reporting of measurable patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This CPG offers practitioner recommendations for best practice regarding OR, may reduce variation between practices and assists with patient aftercare. A carefully chosen retention procedure for individual patients, combined with clear information and communication between orthodontist, dentist and patient will contribute to long-term maintenance of orthodontic treatment results.

A systematic review of orthodontic retention systems: The verdict

INTRODUCTION

Retention during both the active and passive phases of treatment has given rise to numerous publications concerning its efficacy, the range of systems available and its variability over time. There are currently many different retention protocols regularly used by orthodontists; however, their efficacy and duration are still subject to debate. There is as yet no consensus as to which retention protocol is the most effective or for how long the retention device needs to be worn. The aim of this research was to perform a systematic review of the scientific literature in order to evaluate the efficacy of the different retention systems and clinical protocols among those most widely used, so as to make recommendations beneficial to both patient and practitioner.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of the literature was performed in the following databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), ScienceDirect and Cochrane Library. The search was limited to publications in English and French during the period 2006-2016.

RESULTS

Out of 1952 references initially identified, 17 articles corresponded to our inclusion criteria. The results show that: fixed retention is more effective than removable retainers for the maintenance of incisor alignment during the first six months of retention; there is no significant difference in efficacy between the different fixed retention systems; there is no significant difference in efficacy between the vacuum-formed systems and the Hawley retainer; part-time use of removable retainers (between 8-10h/day) is sufficient; the most widely used retention protocol combines a vacuum-formed splint or Hawley retainer in the upper arch with mandibular fixed retention.

CONCLUSION

Despite the large number of studies devoted to orthodontic retention only a few articles corresponded to the methodological criteria of bio statistical analysis. Also, on account of the variations in experimental protocols, the levels of proof relating to the efficacy of different systems are very weak. Research into this topic should first seek to normalize methods of analysis and then perform randomized controlled long-term trials to shed light on this problem.

Does long-term intraoral service affect the mechanical properties and elemental composition of multistranded wires of lingual fixed retainers?

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the elemental and mechanical alterations of stainless steel (SS) multistranded orthodontic wires used in fixed retention after intraoral ageing.

Materials and Methods

Two types of 0.022-inch, seven-stranded wires, Lingual Retainer Wire (LRW) and Tru-Chrome (TCH), from the same manufacturer (Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, Denver, Colo, USA) were tested. Thirty-three samples from LRW group and thirty-seven from TCH were collected, whereas three unused wires from each package were used as controls. The median ageing time for LRW was 7.4 years and 8.4 for TCH. All samples were subjected to scanning electron microscope/X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy analysis. Three spectra were taken from the surface of each wire and then all samples were used for the assessment of Martens hardness, indentation modulus (EIT), and elastic index (ηIT) with the instrumented indentation testing method (IIT). The intraoral ageing time was statistically compared between the two groups by Mann-Whitney rank sum test and the compositional and mechanical properties were compared by unpaired t-test. The Spearman correlation between elemental content and ageing time was carried out for all elements (a = 0.05).

Results

No significant differences were found for both the elemental content and for the mechanical properties between the wires tested. Spearman analysis revealed no correlation between elemental content and intraoral time while two groups share statistically equal intraoral ageing times (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Both wires seemed to maintain their mechanical and elemental integrity within a period of 14-year intraoral exposure, whereas no measurable ionic release could be identified.

Monomer release from orthodontic retentions: An in vitro study

INTRODUCTION

The adhesives used to bond orthodontic retentions are low-loaded composite resins with a resinous matrix containing bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate synthesized from bisphenol A (BPA), fluidizers such as triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) and hydrophilic polymers such as hydroxyethylmethacrylate. BPA disrupts the endocrine balance, and TEGDMA has high risks for human health: eg, allergies and cytotoxicity. The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the release of monomers from orthodontic bonded retentions.

METHODS

A reproducible model of bonded retentions was carried out using calibrated molds. We analyzed the release of monomers by gas phase chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

This model allowed us to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate the in-vitro release of monomers from orthodontic adhesives. The quantitative and qualitative analyses showed no BPA release above the 0.02 ppm detection limit. A greater release of TEGDMA was observed with Transbond LR (31.7 μg/mL) than with Transbond XT (13.12 μg/mL) (both, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif). Other toxic components (iodobenzene, iodobiphenyl, triphenyl stibine, and so on) were also identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Toxic and carcinogenic molecules not mentioned in the material safety data sheets were identified.

Gingival condition associated with two types of orthodontic fixed retainers: a meta-analysis

Background

The maintenance of gingival health around orthodontic fixed retainers (FRs) is difficult and different designs have been proposed.

Objective

The goal of this systematic review was to analyse whether FR designs that allow unobstructed interproximal flossing, compared with the ones that do not, improve gingival parameters.

Search methods

Detailed individual database search strategies for Cochrane Library, 'Latin' American and 'Caribbean' Health Sciences Literature, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were developed. Grey literature was also considered.

Selection criteria

Clinical trials and cross-sectional studies that compared two types of FRs (plain and waved) were included and evaluated.

Data collection and analysis

Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) assessment were performed individually and in duplicate. The methodology quality was assessed using the MAStARI RoB tool.

Results

Four studies met the inclusion criteria, and all presented moderate RoB. While two of those studies found a statistically significant difference in gingival parameters, the other two did not report differences. A meta-analysis was conducted based on two of the selected studies, which performed evaluations of plaque index (PI) and calculus index (CI). The results revealed no differences on PI between wave FR and plain FR of 0.46 (0.24 to 0.69) and no differences on CI of 0.12 (-0.10 to 0.33). Regarding comfort, no clear differences were identified.

Conclusions

There is not enough scientific evidence to support or not an association between FR design and gingival health, flossing frequency, or patient comfort.

Registration

PROSPERO - CRD42016030059.

Retrieval analysis of lingual fixed retainer adhesives

INTRODUCTION

Our objective was to analyze the surface and bulk properties alterations of clinically aged composites used for fixed retention.

METHODS

Twenty-six lingual retainers bonded for different time periods (2.2-17.4 years) were retrieved from postorthodontic patients. Fifteen lingual retainers had been cemented by a chemically cured adhesive (Maximum Cure, Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, Ill), and 11 were treated with a photo-cured adhesive (Flow-Tain, Reliance Orthodontic Products). The first group was in service for 2.8 to 17.4 years and the second for 2.2 to 5.4 years. Five specimens from each material were prepared and used as the control (or reference) group. The debonded surfaces from enamel were studied by attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (n = 3 per material per group), low-vacuum scanning electron microscopy, and energy dispersive x-ray microanalysis (n = 3 per material per group). All specimens were used for the assessment of Vickers hardness, indentation modulus, and elastic index with the instrumented indentation testing method. The values of Vickers hardness, indentation modulus, and elastic index were compared between the retrieved and the reference groups with 1-way analysis of variance and the Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy analysis showed that both retrieved composites demonstrated reduced unsaturation in comparison with the corresponding reference specimens. Some bonded surfaces showed development of organic integuments. All retrieved specimens showed reduced silicon content. Barium was identified only in the photo-cured group. No significant differences were found between the reference and retrieved groups in Vickers hardness, indentation modulus, and elastic index.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the changes in composition, the mechanical properties of the materials tested remained unaffected by intraoral aging.

Influence of piezotomy and osteoperforation of the alveolar process on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The minimally invasive procedures piezosurgical corticocision and osteoperforation have been advocated as methods to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement and to shorten treatment time, but without large-scale trauma of the periosteum and the bone. The aim of this study was to evaluate if there is evidence supporting these claims based on a systematic review of the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of PubMed and Google Scholar with the combined search terms "piezo*" and "tooth movement" was performed until May 2016. In addition, the keywords "osteoperforation" and "piezopuncture" were searched in both databases. All scientific articles were considered and examined for suitability by two scientists. Disagreements resolved by consensus. The first inclusion criterion was studies with human species. Second inclusion criterion the surgical procedure had to be performed transmucosally and without the elevation of a mucoperiosteal flap. Case series were also considered.

RESULTS

The Google Scholar search delivered 516, the PubMed search 60 references. A total of 36 human trials fulfilling the first inclusion criterion were identified. Among those, in only 13 publications was a transmucosal technique used (12 on piezosurgical corticocision and 1 on osteoperforation). Of the 13 articles, 9 represented case series and only 4 were clinical trials. In all four trials, an acceleration of the orthodontic treatment was reported. However, the extent of the acceleration was inconsistent and in one article it disappeared when assessing the overall orthodontic treatment.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for an acceleration of tooth movement in conjunction with the minimally invasive methods piezosurgical corticocision and osteoperforation of the alveolar process in humans is low.

Comparative analysis of the mechanical properties of fiber and stainless steel multistranded wires used for lingual fixed retention

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of different resins used for the co-polymerization of EverStick fiber-reinforced fixed orthodontic retainer on its mechanical properties and to compare the mechanical properties of these configurations to commonly used multistrand wires.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten 0.0175-in. WildCat (WC175), ten 0.0215-in. WildCat (WC215) three-strand twisted wires and thirty EverStick fibers were tested in this study. The EverStcik fibers were equally shared in three groups (n=10). The samples of first group (ESRE) were polymerized employing Stickresin (Light cure enamel adhesives), the second one (ESFT) employing Flow Tain (Light cured composite), whilst the specimens for the third group (ES) were not combined with resin. All samples were loaded in tensile up to fracture in a universal tensile testing machine and the modulus of elasticity, tensile strength and strain after fracture were recorded. The same groups were also tested employing Instrumented Indentation Testing (IIT) and Martens Hardness (HM), Indentation Modulus (E_IT) and elastic index (η_IT) were determined. The results of tensile testing and IIT were statistically analyzed employing one way Anova and the Student Newman Keuls test (SNK) at a=0.05 level of significance.

RESULTS

WC175 and WC215 showed higher modulus of elasticity and tensile strength but lower strain after fracture compared to Everstic groups. IIT illustrated significantly higher values for HM, E_IT, and η_IT for WC groups compared to ESRE, ESFT and ES. ESFT showed higher HM and elastic index compared to ESRE and ES, a finding which is attributed to the fact the FlowTain is a filler-reinforce composite with higher hardness compared to unfilled resins.

SIGNIFICANCE

Multistrand wires demonstrated higher values in mechanical properties compared to EverStick ones. The co-polymerization with difference resins does not affect the tensile properties of Everstic, however the use of a light cured composite has a beneficial effect on hardness.

A Protocol for Treatment of Minor Orthodontic Relapse During Retention

OBJECTIVES

Successful orthodontic treatment presupposes that the esthetic and functional outcomes are maintained. Bonded retainers on the incisors and canines provide this stability. Failure of one or two units exposes the teeth to a relapse. This article describes the use of a retainer wire and an elastic device to provide rapid, effective and esthetic correction of incipient crowding.

CLINICAL ASPECTS

After removing the retainer, a fixed appliance comprising a replacement retainer and a clear elastic are positioned. This device exerts a free tipping force on malpositioned teeth. The space required to realign the contact points is obtained by stripping. When the misaligned teeth are corrected, they are bonded to the retainer and the height of the incisal edges is equalized.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of a new elastic-activated retainer and stripping makes it possible to ensure rapid and effective correction of moderate relapsed crowding.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This article demonstrates the efficacy of a retainer used to correct incipient relapsing crowding. The esthetics of the anterior alignment is restored by means of an almost invisible device. This solution also permits functional guidance to be restored with minimal intervention on the dental tissues while avoiding conventional esthetic techniques involving lingual brackets. (J Esthet Restor Dent 28:359-366,2016).