Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arash, Valiollah, Teimoorian, Mehran, Farajzadeh Jalali, Yasamin, Sheikhzadeh, Sedigheh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32596755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00315-7
_version_ 1783551555553722368
author Arash, Valiollah
Teimoorian, Mehran
Farajzadeh Jalali, Yasamin
Sheikhzadeh, Sedigheh
author_facet Arash, Valiollah
Teimoorian, Mehran
Farajzadeh Jalali, Yasamin
Sheikhzadeh, Sedigheh
author_sort Arash, Valiollah
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7321843
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73218432020-07-07 Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers Arash, Valiollah Teimoorian, Mehran Farajzadeh Jalali, Yasamin Sheikhzadeh, Sedigheh Prog Orthod Research 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. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7321843/ /pubmed/32596755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00315-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Arash, Valiollah
Teimoorian, Mehran
Farajzadeh Jalali, Yasamin
Sheikhzadeh, Sedigheh
Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title_full Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title_fullStr Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title_full_unstemmed Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title_short Clinical comparison between Multi-Stranded Wires and Single strand Ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
title_sort clinical comparison between multi-stranded wires and single strand ribbon wires used for lingual fixed retainers
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321843/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32596755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00315-7
work_keys_str_mv AT arashvaliollah clinicalcomparisonbetweenmultistrandedwiresandsinglestrandribbonwiresusedforlingualfixedretainers
AT teimoorianmehran clinicalcomparisonbetweenmultistrandedwiresandsinglestrandribbonwiresusedforlingualfixedretainers
AT farajzadehjalaliyasamin clinicalcomparisonbetweenmultistrandedwiresandsinglestrandribbonwiresusedforlingualfixedretainers
AT sheikhzadehsedigheh clinicalcomparisonbetweenmultistrandedwiresandsinglestrandribbonwiresusedforlingualfixedretainers