Relapse and Failure Rates Between CAD/CAM and Conventional Fixed Retainers

June 13, 2023 updated by: Nourhan M.Aly

Relapse and Failure Rates Between CAD/CAM and Conventional Fixed Retainers: A 2-year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The aim of this study was to compare the differences in relapse and failure rates in patients treated with fixed retainers (FRs) using Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing technology, lab-based technique, and chairside method.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

43

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Missouri
      • Saint Louis, Missouri, United States, 63104
        • Saint Louis University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • completion of comprehensive orthodontic treatment
  • class I molar and canine relationships
  • indication for a fixed retainer on the mandibular anterior teeth.
  • no extractions done as part of their treatment.
  • Treatment with preadjusted edgewise appliance.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • refusal to participate
  • refusal to have fixed retainers
  • poor oral hygiene
  • non-compliance

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: CAD/CAM group
Custom-bent fixed retainer wires from an in-office CAD/CAM system with FixR software and the BenderI machine (YOAT Corporation, Lynwood, WA). Dentaflex wires- round, 0.5mm in diameter, three-stranded Stainless Steel (Dentaurum GmbH & Co., Ispringen, Germany)- were used for the CAD/CAM group
Other Names:
  • CAD/CAM
Active Comparator: Lab group
The lab group used the same type of wire as the CAD/CAM group but was manually bent by a lab technician
Active Comparator: Chairside group
The chairside group used three-stranded Stainless Steel, 0.974mm x 0.402 mm, flexible Ortho-FlexTech wires (Reliance, Itasca, IL)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in intercanine width (ICW)
Time Frame: 2 years
ICW was measured on the Meshlab software using the 3D ruler measurement tool. Pre-treatment, post-treatment, and post-retention measures were recorded and any change in the ICW was considered relapse.
2 years
Change in Little's Irregularity Index (LII)
Time Frame: 2 years
ICW was measured on the Meshlab software using the 3D ruler measurement tool. Pre-treatment, post-treatment, and post-retention measures were recorded and any change in the LII was considered relapse.
2 years

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Giau Tran, Department of Orthodontics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
  • Principal Investigator: Ryan Rucker, Department of Orthodontics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
  • Study Chair: Patrick Foley, PhD, Department of Orthodontics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
  • Study Chair: Brent Bankhead, Department of Orthodontics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
  • Study Director: Samar M Adel, PhD, Alexandria University
  • Study Director: Ki B Kim, Department of Orthodontics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

September 1, 2019

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 1, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 13, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 13, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

June 22, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 22, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 13, 2023

Last Verified

June 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 32524

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Relapse

Clinical Trials on Computer Aided Design/ Computer Aided Manufacturing Retainers

Subscribe