The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Two-year survival analysis of twisted wire fixed retainer versus spiral wire and fiber-reinforced composite retainers: a preliminary explorative single-blind randomized clinical trial

  • Sobouti, Farhad (Department of Orthodontics, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Rakhshan, Vahid (The Research Council, Iranian Tissue Bank and Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Saravi, Mahdi Gholamrezaei (Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Zamanian, Ali (Department of Restorative Dentistry, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Shariati, Mahsa (Craniomaxillofacial Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2015.06.10
  • Accepted : 2015.09.03
  • Published : 2016.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Traditional retainers (both metal and fiber-reinforced composite [FRC]) have limitations, and a retainer made from more flexible ligature wires might be advantageous. We aimed to compare an experimental design with two traditional retainers. Methods: In this prospective preliminary clinical trial, 150 post-treatment patients were enrolled and randomly divided into three groups of 50 patients each to receive mandibular canine-to-canine retainers made of FRC, flexible spiral wire (FSW), and twisted wire (TW). The patients were monitored monthly. The time at which the first signs of breakage/debonding were detected was recorded. The success rates of the retainers were compared using chi-squared, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional-hazard regression analyses (${\alpha}=0.05$). Results: In total, 42 patients in the FRC group, 41 in the FSW group, and 45 in the TW group completed the study. The 2-year failure rates were 35.7% in the FRC group, 26.8% in the FSW group, and 17.8% in the TW group. These rates differed insignificantly (chi-squared p = 0.167). According to the Kaplan-Meier analysis, failure occurred at 19.95 months in the FRC group, 21.37 months in the FSW group, and 22.36 months in the TW group. The differences between the survival rates in the three groups were not significant (Cox regression p = 0.146). Conclusions: Although the failure rate of the experimental retainer was two times lower than that of the FRC retainer, the difference was not statistically significant. The experimental TW retainer was successful, and larger studies are warranted to verify these results.

Keywords

References

  1. Littlewood SJ, Millett DT, Doubleday B, Bearn DR, Worthington HV. Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(1):CD002283.
  2. Salehi P, Zarif Najafi H, Roeinpeikar SM. Comparison of survival time between two types of orthodontic fixed retainer: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Prog Orthod 2013;14:25. https://doi.org/10.1186/2196-1042-14-25
  3. Stormann I, Ehmer U. A prospective randomized study of different retainer types. J Orofac Orthop 2002;63:42-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-002-0040-6
  4. Zachrisson BU. Clinical experience with direct-bonded orthodontic retainers. Am J Orthod 1977;71:440-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(77)90247-0
  5. Zachrisson BU. The bonded lingual retainer and multiple spacing of anterior teeth. Swed Dent J Suppl 1982;15:247-55.
  6. Bearn DR. Bonded orthodontic retainers: a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:207-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70085-4
  7. Torkan S, Oshagh M, Khojastepour L, Shahidi S, Heidari S. Clinical and radiographic comparison of the effects of two types of fixed retainers on periodontium - a randomized clinical trial. Prog Orthod 2014;15:47. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-014-0047-8
  8. Geserick M, Ball J, Wichelhaus A. Bonding fiber-reinforced lingual retainers with color-reactivating flowable composite. J Clin Orthod 2004;38:560-2.
  9. Orchin JD. Permanent lingual bonded retainer. J Clin Orthod 1990;24:229-31.
  10. Meiers JC, Duncan JP, Freilich MA, Goldberg AJ. Preimpregnated, fiber-reinforced prostheses. Part II. Direct applications: splints and fixed partial dentures. Quintessence Int 1998;29:761-8.
  11. Iniguez I, Strassler HE. Polyethylene ribbon and fixed orthodontic retention and porcelain veneers: solving an esthetic dilemma. J Esthet Dent 1998;10:52-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1998.tb00338.x
  12. Karaman AI, Kir N, Belli S. Four applications of reinforced polyethylene fiber material in orthodontic practice. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;121:650-4. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.123818
  13. 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.
  14. Durbin DD. Relapse and the need for permanent fixed retention. J Clin Orthod 2001;35:723-7.
  15. 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;134:179e1-8.
  16. 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.
  17. Tacken MP, Cosyn J, De Wilde P, 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. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp100
  18. Edman Tynelius G, Bondemark L, Lilja-Karlander E. Evaluation of orthodontic treatment after 1 year of retention--a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod 2010;32:542-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp145
  19. Lai CS, Grossen JM, Renkema AM, Bronkhorst E, Fudalej PS, Katsaros C. Orthodontic retention procedures in Switzerland. Swiss Dent J 2014;124:655-61.
  20. Horton JK, Buschang PH, Oliver DR, Behrents RG. Comparison of the effects of Hawley and perfector/spring aligner retainers on postorthodontic occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:729-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.022
  21. Rowland H, Hichens L, Williams A, Hills D, Killingback N, Ewings P, et al. The effectiveness of Hawley and vacuum-formed retainers: a single-center randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:730-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.019
  22. Sfondrini MF, Fraticelli D, Castellazzi L, Scribante A, Gandini P. Clinical evaluation of bond failures and survival between mandibular canine-to-canine retainers made of flexible spiral wire and fiber-reinforced composite. J Clin Exp Dent 2014;6:e145-9.
  23. Radlanski RJ, Zain ND. Stability of the bonded lingual wire retainer-a study of the initial bond strength. J Orofac Orthop 2004;65:321-35.
  24. Artun J, Spadafora AT, Shapiro PA. A 3-year follow-up study of various types of orthodontic canine-to-canine retainers. Eur J Orthod 1997;19:501-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/19.5.501
  25. Vallittu PK. Flexural properties of acrylic resin polymers reinforced with unidirectional and woven glass fibers. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:318-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70276-3
  26. Bearn DR, McCabe JF, Gordon PH, Aird JC. Bonded orthodontic retainers: the wire-composite interface. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:67-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(97)70304-4
  27. Sobouti F, Rakhshan V, Chiniforush N, Khatami M. Effects of laser-assisted cosmetic smile lift gingivectomy on postoperative bleeding and pain in fixed orthodontic patients: a controlled clinical trial. Prog Orthod 2014;15:66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-014-0066-5
  28. Bolla E, Cozzani M, Doldo T, Fontana M. Failure evaluation after a 6-year retention period: a comparison between glass fiber-reinforced (GFR) and multistranded bonded retainers. Int Orthod 2012;10:16-28.
  29. Ferreira ZA, de Carvalho EK, Mitsudo RS, Bergamo PM. Bondable reinforcement ribbon: clinical applications. Quintessence Int 2000;31:547-52.
  30. Chong KH, Chai J. Strength and mode of failure of unidirectional and bidirectional glass fiber-reinforced composite materials. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:161-6.
  31. Artun J. Caries and periodontal reactions associated with long-term use of different types of bonded lingual retainers. Am J Orthod 1984;86:112-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(84)90302-6
  32. Tanaka E, Ueki K, Kikuzaki M, Yamada E, Takeuchi M, Dalla-Bona D, et al. Longitudinal measurements of tooth mobility during orthodontic treatment using a periotest. Angle Orthod 2005;75:101-5.
  33. Chung K, Lin T, Wang F. Flexural strength of a provisional resin material with fibre addition. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:214-7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1998.00201.x
  34. Dyer SR, Lassila LV, Jokinen M, Vallittu PK. Effect of fiber position and orientation on fracture load of fiber-reinforced composite. Dent Mater 2004;20:947-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2003.12.003
  35. Ellakwa AE, Shortall AC, Shehata MK, Marquis PM. The influence of fibre placement and position on the efficiency of reinforcement of fibre reinforced composite bridgework. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:785-91. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00792.x

Cited by

  1. The effects of fixed and removable orthodontic retainers: a systematic review vol.17, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-016-0137-x
  2. Bending Properties of Fiber-Reinforced Composites Retainers Bonded with Spot-Composite Coverage vol.2017, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8469090
  3. Spot-Bonding and Full-Bonding Techniques for Fiber Reinforced Composite (FRC) and Metallic Retainers vol.18, pp.10, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18102096
  4. Survival analysis of orthodontic retainers vol.40, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx100
  5. Travel beyond Clinical Uses of Fiber Reinforced Composites (FRCs) in Dentistry: A Review of Past Employments, Present Applications, and Future Perspectives vol.2018, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1498901
  6. Shear Bond Strength of the Metal Bracket to Zirconium Ceramic Restoration Treated by the Nd: YAG Laser and Other Methods: An In Vitro Microscopic Study vol.11, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.34172/jlms.2020.65
  7. Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers vol.21, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00315-7
  8. Orthodontic retention protocols: an evidence-based overview vol.230, pp.11, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-021-2954-7