Assessment of the unwanted tooth movement associated with an extended maxillary fixed retainer (3D analysis).
3D
Fixed retainers
Superimposition
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Aug 2024
06 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
02
05
2024
accepted:
17
07
2024
medline:
7
8
2024
pubmed:
7
8
2024
entrez:
6
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Posttreatment changes after orthodontic treatment are challenging. One of the main reasons for such a phenomenon is the lack of patient compliance with removable retainers especially in the maxillary arch, due to palatal coverage, deterioration of speech, decreased masticatory efficiency, and loss of retainers. Fixed retainers have been introduced to overcome patient compliance and provide longer stable results. However, teeth still show movements when a six-unit fixed retainer is in place. Thus, in this study, an eight-unit fixed retainer was evaluated in an attempt to eliminate unwanted movements. THE AIM OF THIS RESEARCH: was to assess short-term positional changes associated with an eight-unit extended maxillary fixed retainer. A single-arm clinical trial was conducted to address the aim of the study. This research was approved by the institutional review board of the Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University (IORG:0008839, No-0479-8/2022). The registration date of this study was 5/06/2023. Twenty-eight patients (19.8 ± 4.5 years) who had finished the active orthodontic phase and started retention had an eight-unit extended maxillary fixed retainer that was bonded to the palatal surface of the maxillary incisors, canines, and the first premolars or the second premolars. Pre-retention and one-year post-retention intra-oral scans were made to produce STL files that were superimposed to determine the amount of tooth change. Additionally, analysis of digital casts and lateral cephalometric radiographs was performed. Statistically significant changes in all planes and the rotation of teeth after one year of retention were found. The upper right lateral incisor exhibited the most evident change in the vertical plane, while the upper right central incisor exhibited the greatest change overall. Minimal changes in the cast measurements were observed. Lateral cephalometric measurements showed minimal changes after one year of retention, and these changes were not statistically significant except in the interincisal angle and the angle between the upper incisor and the line connecting the A-point to the pogonion. Increasing the extension of maxillary fixed retainers did not eliminate unwanted tooth movement in the first year of retention.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Posttreatment changes after orthodontic treatment are challenging. One of the main reasons for such a phenomenon is the lack of patient compliance with removable retainers especially in the maxillary arch, due to palatal coverage, deterioration of speech, decreased masticatory efficiency, and loss of retainers. Fixed retainers have been introduced to overcome patient compliance and provide longer stable results. However, teeth still show movements when a six-unit fixed retainer is in place. Thus, in this study, an eight-unit fixed retainer was evaluated in an attempt to eliminate unwanted movements. THE AIM OF THIS RESEARCH: was to assess short-term positional changes associated with an eight-unit extended maxillary fixed retainer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
A single-arm clinical trial was conducted to address the aim of the study. This research was approved by the institutional review board of the Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University (IORG:0008839, No-0479-8/2022). The registration date of this study was 5/06/2023. Twenty-eight patients (19.8 ± 4.5 years) who had finished the active orthodontic phase and started retention had an eight-unit extended maxillary fixed retainer that was bonded to the palatal surface of the maxillary incisors, canines, and the first premolars or the second premolars. Pre-retention and one-year post-retention intra-oral scans were made to produce STL files that were superimposed to determine the amount of tooth change. Additionally, analysis of digital casts and lateral cephalometric radiographs was performed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Statistically significant changes in all planes and the rotation of teeth after one year of retention were found. The upper right lateral incisor exhibited the most evident change in the vertical plane, while the upper right central incisor exhibited the greatest change overall. Minimal changes in the cast measurements were observed. Lateral cephalometric measurements showed minimal changes after one year of retention, and these changes were not statistically significant except in the interincisal angle and the angle between the upper incisor and the line connecting the A-point to the pogonion.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Increasing the extension of maxillary fixed retainers did not eliminate unwanted tooth movement in the first year of retention.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39107745
doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04622-x
pii: 10.1186/s12903-024-04622-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Clinical Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
899Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Sj L, Dt M, Doubleday B, Hv W. The effects of fixed and removable orthodontic retainers: a systematic review. Prog Orthod. 2016;17:24.
doi: 10.1186/s40510-016-0137-x
Wolf M, Schulte U, Küpper K, Bourauel C, Keilig L, Papageorgiou SN, et al. Post-therapeutische Veränderungen unter permanenter Retention. J Orofac Orthop. 2016;77(6):446–53.
pubmed: 27761588
doi: 10.1007/s00056-016-0054-0
Sn P. Post-treatment changes in permanent retention Posttreatment movement of teeth in patients wearing a permanent fixed lingual retainer in the anterior mandible. (Accession No. 7744653)(Doctoral dissertation). Bonn University; 2016.
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):471–6.
pubmed: 17974536
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm042
Kartal Y, Kaya B. Fixed orthodontic retainers: a review. Turkish J Orthod. 2019;32(2):110–4.
doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2019.18080
Padmos JAD, Fudalej PS, Renkema AM. Epidemiologic study of orthodontic retention procedures. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2018;153(4):496–504.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.08.013
Renkema AM, Renkema A, Bronkhorst E, Katsaros C. Long-term effectiveness of canine-to-canine bonded flexible spiral wire lingual retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;139(5):614–21.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.041
Pratt MC, Kluemper GT, Hartsfield JK, Fardo D, Nash DA. Evaluation of retention protocols among members of the American Association of Orthodontists in the United States. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;140(4):520–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.10.023
Maia NG, Normando D, Maia FA, Ferreira MÂF, Do Socorro Costa Feitosa Alves M. Factors associated with long-term patient satisfaction. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(6):1155–8.
pubmed: 20677969
pmcid: 8929510
doi: 10.2319/120909-708.1
Störmann I, Ehmer U. A prospective randomized study of different retainer types. J Orofac Orthop. 2002;63(1):42–50.
pubmed: 11974451
doi: 10.1007/s00056-002-0040-6
Al-moghrabi D, Mary Q. Orthodontic retention : a prospective evaluation of stability , orthodontic retention : a prospective evaluation of stability , periodontal outcomes and adherence a thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Oral Bioengineering Bar. 2020.
Gomez M, Herrera LE, Suarez A, Sanchez G. Post-orthodontic retention effectiveness of two types of fixed retainers in patients aged between 12 and 35: a systematic literature review. Odontoestomatologia. 2017;19(29):1–19.
Krämer A, Sjöström M, Hallman M, Feldmann I. Vacuum-formed retainer versus bonded retainer for dental stabilization in the mandible-A randomized controlled trial. Part I: Retentive capacity 6 and 18 months after orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2020;42(5):551–8.
pubmed: 31665279
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjz072
Kučera J, Littlewood SJ, Marek I. Fixed retention: pitfalls and complications. Br Dent J. 2021;230(11):703–8.
pubmed: 34117424
doi: 10.1038/s41415-021-2892-4
Knaup I, Bartz JR, Schulze-Späte U, Craveiro RB, Kirschneck C, Wolf M. Side effects of twistflex retainers—3D evaluation of tooth movement after retainer debonding. J Orofac Orthop. 2021;82(2):121–30.
pubmed: 33258981
doi: 10.1007/s00056-020-00265-z
Knaup I, Schulte U, Bartz JR, Niederau C, Craveiro RB, Jäger A, et al. Post-treatment stability in orthodontic retention with twistflex retainers—do patients benefit from additional removable retainers? Clin Oral Investig. 2022;26:5215.
pubmed: 35474552
pmcid: 9381486
doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04490-1
Kučera J, Marek I. Unexpected complications associated with mandibular fixed retainers: a retrospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2016;149(2):202–11.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.07.035
Shaughnessy TG, Proffit WR, Samara SA. Inadvertent tooth movement with fixed lingual retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2016;149(2):277–86.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.015
Katsaros C, Livas C, Renkema AM. Unexpected complications of bonded mandibular lingual retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(6):838–41.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.011
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 Dentofac Orthop. 2008;134(2):179.e1-179.e8.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.12.021
Katsaros C, Livas C, Renkema AM. Unexpected complications of bonded mandibular lingual retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(6):838–41.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.011
Poojar B, Ommurugan B, Adiga S, Thomas H, Sori RK, Poojar B, et al. Methodology used in the study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2017;7(10):1–5.
Ben Mohimd H, Lmaroudia O, Zaoui F, Bahije L. Retention practices among orthodontists in Morocco. Integr J Med Sci. 2020;7:1–6.
doi: 10.15342/ijms.7.150
Hamran T, Čirgić E, Aiyar A, Vandevska-Radunovic V. Survey on retention procedures and use of thermoplastic retainers among orthodontists in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. J World Fed Orthod. 2022;11(4):114–9.
pubmed: 35718706
Sohrabi A, Rafighi A, Moslemzadeh SH, Moghaddam SF. Comparison of two different retention techniques on re-opening of extraction space at different intervals during the retention phase in fixed orthodontic patients. Iran J Ortho. 2014;9(3):e3747.
Rezaei N, Bagheri Z, Golshah A. Survival analysis of three types of maxillary and mandibular bonded orthodontic retainers: a retrospective cohort. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):1–10.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02202-5
Dahl EH, Zachrisson BU. Long-term experience with direct-bonded lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod. 1991;25(10):619–30.
pubmed: 1814943
Highfield J. Diagnosis and classification of periodontal disease. Aust Dent J. 2009;54:S11-26.
pubmed: 19737262
doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2009.01140.x
Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 8th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning; 2015.
Universität Düsseldorf. G*Power. 2019. Available at: http://www.gpower.hhu.de/ .
Self-etching primers: is prophylactic pumicing necessary? A randomized clinical trial. | Semantic Schola. 2022.
Mahmoud GA, Grawish ME, Shamaa MS, Abdelnaby YL. Characteristics of adhesive bonding with enamel deproteinization. Dental Press J Orthod. 2019;24(5):29.e1-29.e8.
pubmed: 31721943
doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.24.5.29.e1-8.onl
Hu H, Li C, Li F, Chen J, Sun J, Zou S, et al. Enamel etching for bonding fixed orthodontic braces. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013(11):CD005516.
pubmed: 24272130
pmcid: 6494434
Durgesh BH, Al Hijji S, Kheraif AAA, Ramakrishnaiah R, Basavarajappa S, Al Sharawy M, et al. A novel silane system as a primer for orthodontic bonding - a pilot study. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2015;62:101–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2015.07.006
Ward JD, Wolf BJ, Leite LP, Zhou J. Clinical effect of reducing curing times with high-intensity LED lights. Angle Orthod. 2015;85(6):1064–9.
pubmed: 25760887
pmcid: 4955548
doi: 10.2319/080714-556.1
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63.
pubmed: 27330520
pmcid: 4913118
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
Adel SM, Vaid NR, El-Harouni N, Kassem H, Zaher AR. TIP, TORQUE & ROTATIONS: How accurately do digital superimposition software packages quantify tooth movement? Prog Orthod. 2022;23(1):8.
pubmed: 35284950
pmcid: 8918442
doi: 10.1186/s40510-022-00402-x
HuancaGhislanzoni LT, Lineberger M, Cevidanes LHS, Mapelli A, Sforza C, McNamara JA. Evaluation of tip and torque on virtual study models: a validation study. Prog Orthod. 2013;14:19.
doi: 10.1186/2196-1042-14-19
Chen G, Chen S, Zhang XY, Jiang RP, Liu Y, Shi FH, et al. Stable region for maxillary dental cast superimposition in adults, studied with the aid of stable miniscrews. Orthod Craniofacial Res. 2011;14(2):70–9.
doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01510.x
Al-Jasser R, Al-Subaie M, Al-Jasser N, Al-Rasheed A. Rotational relapse of anterior teeth following orthodontic treatment and circumferential supracrestal fiberotomy. Saudi Dent J. 2020;32(6):293–9.
pubmed: 32874069
doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.10.003
Adamek A, Minch L, Kawala B. Intercanine width – review of the literature. 2015;336–40.
Rathi MK, Fida M. Applicability of pont’s index in orthodontics. J Coll Physicians Surg Pakistan. 2014;24(4):256–60.
Little RM. The Irregularity Index: a quantitative score of mandibular anterior alignment. Am J Orthod. 1975;68(5):554–63.
pubmed: 1059332
doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(75)90086-X
Stucki S, Gkantidis N. Assessment of techniques used for superimposition of maxillary and mandibular 3D surface models to evaluate tooth movement: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2020;42(5):559–70.
pubmed: 31742598
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjz075
Vasilakos G, Schilling R, Halazonetis D, Gkantidis N. Assessment of different techniques for 3D superimposition of serial digital maxillary dental casts on palatal structures. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–11.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-06013-5
Inchingolo F, Inchingolo AM, Ceci S, Carpentiere V, Garibaldi M, Riccaldo L, et al. Orthodontic relapse after fixed or removable retention devices: a systematic review. Appl Sci. 2023;13(20):11442.
doi: 10.3390/app132011442
Aye ST, Liu S, Byrne E, El-Angbawi A. The prevalence of the failure of fixed orthodontic bonded retainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2023;45(6):645–61.
pubmed: 37824794
pmcid: 10687514
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjad047
Charavet C, Vives F, Aroca S, Dridi SM. “Wire syndrome” following bonded orthodontic retainers: a systematic review of the literature. Healthc. 2022;10(2):1–18.
doi: 10.3390/healthcare10020379
Klaus K, Xirouchaki F, Ruf S. 3D-analysis of unwanted tooth movements despite bonded orthodontic retainers: a pilot study. BMC Oral Health. 2020;20(1):1–12.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-020-01304-2
Kim TK, Baek SH. Lingual bonded retainers: a case series of complications and resolutions. APOS Trends Orthod. 2020;10(1):3–11.
doi: 10.25259/APOS_3_2020
Steegmans PAJ, Jonkman REG, de Lange J. Fixed flexible spiral wire retainers and unwanted tooth movements: a case report. Appl Sci. 2023;13(2):922.
doi: 10.3390/app13020922
Sfondrini MF, Pascadopoli M, Beccari S, Beccari G, Rizzi C, Gandini P, et al. Orthodontic fixed retainer and unwanted movements of lower anterior teeth: a case report. Case Rep Dent. 2022;2022:3100360.
pubmed: 36090691
pmcid: 9463015
Singh P. Canine avulsion: an extreme complication of a fixed mandibular lingual retainer. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2021;160(3):473–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.04.013