Comparison of survival time between two types of orthodontic fixed retainer: a prospective randomized clinical trial

Parisa Salehi, Hooman Zarif Najafi, Seyyed Mehdi Roeinpeikar, Parisa Salehi, Hooman Zarif Najafi, Seyyed Mehdi Roeinpeikar

Abstract

Background: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the mean durability and the failure rates of two types of orthodontic retainers.

Methods: Orthodontic patients (142) aged between 14 and 28 years were recruited in this study. The polyethylene woven ribbon (Ribbond, Seattle, WA, USA) retainer was compared with a 0.0175-in flexible spiral wire (Respond, Ormco, Glendora, CA, USA) retainer. When treatment was completed, the retainers were bonded from canine to canine in the maxillary and the mandibular arches of the participants. In the follow-up visits, the patients were re-evaluated every 3 months over a period of 18 months. The time taken for the retainers to remain without any fracture was appraised. Kaplan-Meier analysis and the logrank test were employed to identify significant differences in the survival functions between the groups. The rates of the retainers' failure between the groups were analyzed using Chi-square test.

Results: It was revealed that the mean survival of the flexible spiral wire retainer was 15.34±0.47 and 15.60±0.42 months in the maxillary and mandibular arches, respectively. The mean survival of the ribbon retainer was 13.95±0.55 and 14.26±0.57 months in the maxillary and mandibular arches, respectively. Ribbon retainers showed a failure rate of 50% in the maxillary and 42.6% in the mandibular arches. Flexible spiral retainers showed a failure rate of 36.5% in the maxillary and 37.8% in the mandibular arches. The differences were not statistically significant. Regarding the evaluation period, the differences had limited clinical significance.

Conclusion: The mean survival time and the failure rates of the polyethylene woven ribbon retainer were comparable to the flexible spiral wire retainer during the 18 months after orthodontic treatment.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan-Meier survival plot of the multi-stranded and ribbon retainer in the maxillary arch.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan-Meier survival plot of the multi-stranded and ribbon retainer in the mandibular arch.

References

    1. Little RM, Wallen TR, Riedel RA. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior alignment—first premolar extraction cases treated by traditional edgewise orthodontics. Am J Orthod. 1981;80:349–65. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(81)90171-8.
    1. Little RM, Riedel RA, Årtun J. An evaluation of changes in mandibular anterior alignment from 10 to 20 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988;93:423–28. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(88)90102-3.
    1. Uhde MD, Sadowsky C, BeGole EA. Long-term stability of dental relationships after orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1983;53:240–52.
    1. Sadowsky C, Schneider BJ, BeGole EA, Tahir E. Long-term stability after orthodontic treatment: nonextraction with prolonged retention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;106:243–49. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70043-5.
    1. Parker WS. Retention-retainers may be forever. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989;95:505–13. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90414-9.
    1. Durbin DD. Relapse and the need for permanent fixed retention. J Clin Orthod. 2001;35:723–27.
    1. Cerny R. Permanent fixed lingual retention. J Clin Orthod. 2001;35:728–32.
    1. Knelrim RW. Invisible mandibular cuspid to cuspid retainer. Angle Orthod. 1973;43:218–19.
    1. Zachrisson BU. Clinical experience with direct-bonded orthodontic retainers. Am J Orthod. 1977;71:440–48. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(77)90247-0.
    1. Zachrisson BU. The bonded lingual retainer and multiple spacing of anterior teeth. Swed Dent J Suppl. 1982;15:247–55.
    1. Årtun J, Zachrisson BU. Improving the handling properties of a composite resin for direct bonding. Am J Orthod. 1982;81:269–76. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(82)90212-3.
    1. Diamond M. Resin fiberglass bonded retainer. J Clin Orthod. 1987;21:182–83.
    1. Geserick M, Ball J, Wichelhaus A. Bonding fiber-reinforced lingual retainers with color-reactivating flowable composite. J Clin Orthod. 2004;38:560–62.
    1. Pandis N, Vlahopoulos K, Madianos P, Eliades T. Long-term periodontal status of patients with mandibular lingual fixed retention. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29(5):471–76. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm042.
    1. Bearn DR. Bonded orthodontic retainers: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;108:207–13. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70085-4.
    1. Orchin JD. Permanent lingual bonded retainer. J Clin Orthod. 1990;24:229–31.
    1. Miller TE, Hakimzadeh F, Rudo DN. Immediate and indirect woven polyethylene ribbon-reinforced periodontal-prosthetic splint: a case report. Quintessence Int. 1995;26:267–71.
    1. Goldberg AJ, Freilich MA. An innovative pre-impregnated glass fiber for reinforcing composites. Dent Clin North Am. 1999;43:127–33.
    1. Karaman AI, Kir N, Belli S. Four applications of reinforced polyethylene fiber material in orthodontic practice. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121:650–54. doi: 10.1067/mod.2002.123818.
    1. Rose E, Frucht S, Jonas IE. Clinical comparison of a multistranded wire and a direct-bonded polyethylene ribbon-reinforced resin composite used for lingual retention. Quintessence Int. 2002;33:579–83.
    1. Dahl EH, Zachrisson BU. Long-term experience with direct-bonded lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod. 1991;25:619–30.
    1. Foek DL, Ozcan M, Krebs E, Sandham A. Adhesive properties of bonded orthodontic retainers to enamel: stainless steel wire vs fiber-reinforced composites. J Adhes Dent. 2009;11:381–90.
    1. Renkema AM, Al-Assad S, Bronkhorst E, Weindel S, Katsaros C, Lisson JA. Effectiveness of lingual retainers bonded to the canines in preventing mandibular incisor relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134(179):e1–8.
    1. Tacken MP, Cosyn J, Wilde P, De Aerts J, Govaerts E, Vannet BV. Glass fibre reinforced versus multistranded bonded orthodontic retainers: a 2 year prospective multi-centre study. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32:117–23. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjp100.
    1. Tanaka E, Ueki K, Kikuzaki M, Yamada E, Takeuchi M, Dalla-Bona D, Tanne K. Longitudinal measurements of tooth mobility during orthodontic treatment using a periotest. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:101–15.
    1. Artun J. Caries and periodontal reactions associated with long-term use of different types of bonded lingual retainers. Am J Orthod. 1984;86:112–18. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(84)90302-6.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する